HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Agenda Packet 2018-08-22
AGENDA
PLANNING COMMISSION 321 East Fifth Street
August 22, 2018
6:00 p.m.
I. CALL TO ORDER
Pledge of Allegiance led by Chair
II. ROLL CALL
III. PUBLIC COMMENT
IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Regular meeting of August 8, 2018
V. ACTION/DISCUSSION ITEMS/OTHER BUSINESS
1. Public Hearing: Council Forwarded Temporary Dwelling Unit Ordinance
2. Public Comment Address Requirements
VI. STAFF UPDATES
VII. REPORTS OF COMMISSION MEMBERS
VIII. ADJOURNMENT
C OMMUNITY & E CONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION
City Council Chambers Port Angeles, Washington 98362 August 8, 2018 6:00 p.m. REGULAR MEETING
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Chair Schwab opened the regular meeting at 6:00 p.m.
ROLL CALL
Commissioners Present: Pamela Hastings, Duane Morris, Andrew Schwab (Chair), Steven Hopkins (Vice-Chair), Amy Powell, Benjamin Stanley
Commissioners Absent: None
City Staff Present: Allyson Brekke (Acting Director) Ben Braudrick (Assistant Planner)
Public Present: John Ralston, Tommy Wood, Bliss Wood
COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE PUBLIC
John Ralston, PO Box 898, Port Angeles, WA 98362
Mr. Ralston spoke to the importance of short term rentals in the community. He appreciates the façade grant program and suggested that all applications require bids to be prepared by
professionals.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
Commissioner Stanley made a motion to approve the June 13, 2018 Minutes. Commissioner Hopkins seconded the motion with the correction of Commissioner Hastings being shown as
making a motion on the sign façade grant. All were in approval, with Chair Schwab abstaining.
ACTION/DISCUSSION ITEMS/OTHER BUSINESS
1. Façade Grant Application for Bliss Wood (No. 18-07) – 207 West 1st Street
Assistant Planner Ben Braudrick presented the Staff Report for Facade Grant No. 18-
07.
Chair Schwab opened it up to Commissioners to ask questions to Staff. Commissioner
Hopkins asked a question.
Chair Schwab invited the applicant to introduce himself at the podium.
Commissioners asked the applicant several questions clarifying the design of the project.
6:13 p.m. Chair called for a motion.
Planning Commission Minutes
August 8, 2018
Page 2
Commissioner Hastings made a motion to approve Sign Grant No. 18-07 citing the 7
findings and 6 conditions listed in the Staff Report. Commission Stanley seconded
the motion. All were in approval.
2. Council Forwarded Temporary Dwelling Unit Ordinance (Discussion)
Acting Director Brekke presented the information from the May 1, 2018 Council
Meeting and answered questions from the Commission.
3. Other Business: Public Comment Procedure
Commissioner Hopkins asked to have Planning Commission procedure for public
comment be identical to City Council. Staff responded that they would review the City
Council decision and follow up with procedure recommendations at the next scheduled
meeting.
STAFF UPDATES
None.
REPORTS OF COMMISSION MEMBERS
Commissioner Schwab commented about the traffic concerns being posted on Facebook.
ADJOURNMENT
Commissioner Hopkins made a motion to adjourn, Commission Hastings seconded.
The meeting adjourned at 6:45 p.m.
Ben Braudrick, Secretary Andrew Schwab, Chair
PREPARED BY: Ben Braudrick, Secretary
STAFF REPORT DATE: Friday, August 17, 2018
STAFF PLANNER: Allyson Brekke, Planning Manager
Ben Braudrick, Assistant Planner
APPLICATION: Municipal Code Amendment (MCA) Application No. 18-43
LOCATION: Citywide
STAFF REPORT
CONTENTS
I. Summary ......................................................................................................................................... 2
II. City Staff Comments ...................................................................................................................... 2
Public Safety & Crime .................................................................................................................... 2
Real Estate & Property .................................................................................................................. 3
Utilities ........................................................................................................................................... 3
Questions on Proposed Ordinance Language .............................................................................. 3
Three Year Plan Concerns ............................................................................................................. 4
Permits ........................................................................................................................................... 4
Code Enforcement ......................................................................................................................... 5
III. Other Options to Consider for Temporary Housing ................................................................... 6
IV. Alternatives to Temporary Housing ............................................................................................ 6
V. Solution Websites ......................................................................................................................... 7
VI.Staff Recommendations ............................................................................................................... 7
1
I. SUMMARY
On May 1, 2018, the City Council discussed a temporary dwelling unit ordinance. The ordinance
proposes to allow recreational vehicle (RV) type structures to be occupied and utilized as
temporary dwelling units on private property. A temporary use permit may be obtained from the
Director of Community and Economic Development to allow temporary occupancy of a RV type
structure for up to twelve months. The ordinance does allow for an applicant to renew said permit.
Overall, the ordinance is set to expire three years following its adoption. However, the ordinance
allows for individual permits to go beyond the three year date. The director must verify the RV
structure has a current Washington Labor and Industry endorsement to ensure the structure is
livable. The ordinance does not require the RV structure to establish permanent utility
connections but will allow for the RV structure to connect to the permanent structure’s utilities.
The full ordinance is included in “Attachment A”.
The ordinance as proposed was distributed to City Departments and Divisions with the request to
receive comments. Those comments are summarized below.
II. CITY STAFF COMMENTS
Public Safety & Crime:
1. A physical address must be placed on a temporary dwelling in order for proper response times
in cases of emergency for the fire, police and ambulance.
2. Smoke detectors must be located in each unit.
3. The RCWs and WACs that are referenced seem to only apply to manufactures and dealers that
insure when a RV is sold, it meets the L&I compliance codes. This is fine if the RV that someone
plans to use for their temporary dwelling unit is new or no more than five years old, but what
about the RV structures that that much older and would likely not pass an acceptable living
inspection. What will the inspection process look like for these temporary dwelling units? It
seems it would be a major liability to the person allowing an older RV to be on their property
and used for temporary housing if something was to occur, such as fire or CO2 poisoning.
4. We need to consider public crime in this scenario. Some in the community look down upon
the homeless and vagrancy has its own negative implications. So people may not be happy to
now have what they deem as unsavory characters living in RVs within their neighborhoods.
This is not to say that everyone living in this situation is bad, but the potential for crime
increases are possible. This then could potentially increase call volume to the Police
Department and heavier dispatch rates to this areas because of neighborhood complaints.
5. How are background checks for individuals who are applying for permits performed, to ensure
lower criminal rates or intrusions into certain areas? (eg. Sex offender being too close to a
school).
2
Real Estate & Property:
1. Will this impact the sales of neighboring properties?
2. How does this impact neighbor’s view shed?
3. How is minimum access to each unit, in terms of space from other dwellings on the site,
guaranteed with the temporary use permit process?
4. We also need to take into consideration the potential effects on property values in the
neighborhoods that will potentially have these temporary dwelling units in them. As we grow
as a city, this can have a severe impact on people looking to move here and seeing it as normal
to have temporary dwelling units all over.
Utilities:
1. Concerned about the safety of the above-ground/temporary connections to power, sewer,
and water, as well as the financial liability to the City for these types of connections.
2. There needs to be a closer look at what would happen to city power, water and sewer rates if
we suddenly have an influx of temporary housing units (such as rolling black outs due to the
power grid not being able to support the extra power being drawn, sewage backups in homes,
failed septic systems, etc).
3. “Selling” power and water is not allowed. For example, the property owner says “my bill used
be X and now it’s Y” and tries to obtain money from the RV dweller for the excess cost of
utilities (this is illegal).
Questions on Proposed Ordinance Language:
1. A twelve month period plus an option to extend exceeds current zoning code’s definition of
“temporary” as described in Section 17.96.075.
2. “These temporary dwelling units are already available as a source of housing and could be
available as affordable housing to relieve the affordable housing crisis.”
The scope of this statement seems questionable. Certainly not all RVs are available for
temporary dwelling units. Is there any evidence about how many dwelling units would come
onto the market?
3. Section 17.96.074 (Temporary dwelling units during housing shortages) or Section
17.956.06075 PAMC (Temporary Use Permit)
I understand that no change is intended to 17.96.075. Is that correct?
3
4. As a practical matter, it is very difficult to enforce the provision that some residence is
temporary. Once a family moves into some structure, it becomes their home, and it is legally
difficult and politically unpopular to force them out.
5. “Recreational vehicles and recreational park trailers” - Clearly define these terms
6. “The temporary dwelling unit is sited fully on the landowner permittee's property and complies
with setbacks, site location, number of vehicles, and other requirements in Section 8.30.060
PAMC (Parking of vehicles on residential property)”
Other limitations? For example, can a family of four take up residence in a VW camper van?
7. “The permittee shall also provide adjoining neighbors with a copy of the temporary use
permit.”
Whois this referring to? Can neighbors object to the use? They would have a right to object
prior to issuance of most other permits.
Three Year Plan Concerns:
1. Three-year sunset doesn't feel like a long enough period to allow for low income housing to
become available and once set up how do we take away in three years? (Liability and increased
homelessness in 3 years).
2. Once the three year period is up, what then? We go and send out eviction notices or do we
have a plan in place to have better housing options? It seems it would make sense that we
would limit the number of permits and be active in finding permanent housing for these
individuals and keep this a revolving cycle until we are in a position to increase rentals as a
whole for the community.
Permits:
1. Does the city then handle/issue a certificate of occupancy?
2. Concerned there will be an issue with the amount of permits that the City will issue. Perhaps
it is beneficial to have a maximum that the City would give out to help prevent this from turning
into a situation that allows people who may not be in need of temporary housing to capitalize
on cheaper rent for three years. We need a way to determine the needs of people that are
applying for these permits so we can give access to people who truly need temporary housing.
3. What department and what does staffing look like for handling this permitting process?
4
Code Enforcement:
1. This proposed ordinance appears to need an analysis of projected code compliance and
enforcement needed to ensure success. We know that we lack sufficient code compliance
resources right now. Should an analysis of this proposed ordinance show that it will be in large
success (i.e. have voluntary compliance) without a need for additional enforcement resources
that would be helpful to know. Given the large number of unaddressed code enforcement
needs and the reality of having to delay or prioritize some code important due to limited
resources, adding additional workload should be carefully considered. This proposed
ordinance if adopted would have a higher chance of success if it there is an apparent certainty
of consistent enforcement. Our current challenges with junk vehicle abatement and storage
of trailers and RVs on City streets given our limited code enforcement resources might be
instructive.
2. “This ordinance creates an additional exemption, provided through temporary use permits,
from an existing prohibition on RVs and park trailers as dwellings. This ordinance would likely
increase the number of temporary use permits issued by the City, which would involve staff
time. However, it may also decrease the number of RVs and park trailers that do not conform
to nuisance parking codes, or illegally camp on city streets, which may decrease staff time
involved in code enforcement.”
The reality is that currently there is no dedicated staff resources to code enforcement (there
is no Code Compliance Officer on staff). There will be no savings of staff time with the
anticipated increase of temporary use permit application review and processing. This will be
added on top of an existing situation where Staff is unable to fairly and adequately enforce the
public nuisance complaint forms currently being received.
3. Over this past year, numerous public nuisance complaint forms have been received with
specific concerns of abandoned or run-down RV structures on property.
4. Below are a list of items that Staff has continually responded to in a Code Enforcement capacity
related to RV structures:
a. Electrical hazards related to using extension cords for power or over loading in colder
weather.
b. Maintaining Sewage connections or the lack of.
c. Fire hazards, including but not limited to, LPG fuel leaks and separation distance to
structures.
d. Trash, storage, debris, parking and general maintenance of the property.
e. Drug use and activity in relation to attractive nuisance.
5
f. If this proposed Ordinance is temporary in nature, what will the end result look like related
to enforcement of those who continue to use their property?
g. Degradation of neighborhoods and property values.
h. Enforcement of permits for Electrical, Plumbing, etc.
III. OTHER OPTIONS TO CONSIDER FOR TEMPORARY HOUSING
1. Please consider a park model and or a tiny house of some sort that would be more permanent
in nature and be certified by the State of Washington or “Stick Built” as you know there are
many requests for this type of use.
2. If an RV would be the desired method, I would use Zoning to steer this option to a park or a
vacant piece of land for a temporary use. Similar to what Williston N. Dakota did during the oil
boom recently.
3. What about construction of additional trailer parks in the City Limits? How would those be
monitored and what requirements would be attached to those parks? Why would we allow
lower standards for an RV in residential areas? City and homeowner liabilities for allowing
unsafe connections.
4. How can local businesses or churches help out with this problem?
5. FEMA containers for temp housing in a location.
6. Create temporary dwelling locations within the city or county.
IV. ALTERNATIVES TO TEMPORARY HOUSING
1. ARU setbacks have been reduced to those matching detached accessory structure setbacks to
allow the conversion of a detached garage to living space which previously was not possible.
2. Create a rental registry that can fund itself. All rental properties in the City must be registered.
. The registry will allow/require properties be inspected every two years with strict
enforcement of Nuisance ordinances.
3. If a property has an ARU require owners that choose to place an ARU in the short
term/vacation rental market to occupy one of the structures. Those choosing to place both
units into the long term rental market can rent both
4. Allow increased lot coverage, larger units, or more bedrooms, for an ARU if placed into the
long term rental market. Creating an ARU as a one bedroom unit limits the ability to rent to
couple with one or two children.
5. Strictly enforce with fines the use of property as a short term rental in any single family zone.
6
6. For existing two-story homes allow an exemption to the 50% or smaller size rule. Also, create
an exemption to the regulations requiring separate utilities if for units placed into the long
term rental market.
V. SOLUTION WEBSITES
https://charterforcompassion.org/problem-solving/tiny-houses-for-the-homeless-an-affordable-solution-catches-on
https://endhomelessness.org/
https://www.npr.org/2015/12/10/459100751/utah-reduced-chronic-homelessness-by-91-percent-heres-how
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Recommend City Council move forward with the Temporary Dwelling Units Ordinance as
written and direct staff to conduct a full review before then bringing the ordinance back to the
Council for a Public Hearing; or
2. Recommend City Council move forward with the Temporary Dwelling Units Ordinance with
changes agreed upon by the majority of Planning Commission and bring the ordinance back to
the Council for a Public Hearing; or
3. Conclude that the majority of the Planning Commission does not wish to move forward with
the direction of the ordinance; or
4. Provide another option not described above.
7
DATE: May 1, 2018
TO: City Council FROM: DAN MCKEEN, CITY MANAGER
SUBJECT: Temporary Dwelling Units
Summary: Councilmember Schromen-Wawrin drafted and circulated a proposed Temporary
Dwelling Unit Ordinance, which is presented as an attachment to this memo. Before the
ordinance moves forward for in-depth staff review and a public hearing, direction is needed from the Council.
Funding: N/A.
Recommendation: Council should discuss the agenda item and provide direction to staff through one of four recommended options:
1. Move forward with the Temporary Dwelling Units Ordinance as written and direct
staff to conduct a full review before then bringing the ordinance back to the Council
for a Public Hearing, or
2. Move forward with the Temporary Dwelling Units Ordinance with changes agreed upon by the majority of Council. Direct staff to conduct a full review of the updated
ordinance and then bring the ordinance back to the Council for a Public Hearing, or
3. Conclude that the majority of Council does not wish to move forward with the
direction of the ordinance, or
4. Provide another option not described above.
Background/Analysis: Councilmember Schromen-Wawrin has drafted a proposed Temporary
Dwelling Unit Ordinance and circulated it to staff and community stakeholders for input. After
incorporating some of the feedback he received, he then provided the draft to the full Council,
and he has asked that the ordinance be added to the Council agenda for consideration.
Councilmember Schromen-Wawrin is prepared to discuss the merits of the ordinance and to answer any questions from Council.
C I T Y C O U N C I L M E M O
Attachment A: Council Memo and Meeting Minutes
A-1
Prior to the ordinance being placed on the agenda for consideration, Council should first decide
if the majority wants to move forward with such an ordinance. Secondly, if the body does want
to move forward, you should decide if there are any substantive changes you would like to make
to the proposed ordinance.
If it is the policy direction of Council, an in-depth review of the proposed ordinance will be
conducted by the appropriate staff prior to Council’s consideration of adoption. The review
would include staff in the Legal, Community & Economic Development, Public Works, Fire and
Police Departments in order to look at considerations such as zoning, public safety, electrical and sewer connectivity for the proposed temporary dwelling units. The Department of Commerce
may also need to be notified if the ordinance proposes zoning code changes. If it is the direction
of Council, I will direct staff resources to begin the in-depth review and will schedule a
subsequent Public Hearing on the matter. However, if the majority of Council is not in favor of
pursuing the ordinance, then it wouldn’t be appropriate to expend the staff resources at this time.
Funding Overview: N/A.
Attachments: Background provided by Councilmember Schromen-Wawrin Proposed Ordinance from Councilmember Schromen-Wawrin
Attachment A: Council Memo and Meeting Minutes
A-2
Background / Analysis:
This ordinance modifies the City of Port Angeles' rules on RVs and recreational park trailers as
dwelling units, authorizing temporary use permits allowing these structures to be dwelling units during
the current housing shortage.
Over the last seven years of U.S. Census American Communities Survey (ACS) reports, the
rental vacancy rate in Clallam County has dropped to 1.8%. This is almost the lowest rental vacancy
rate of any county in Washington State. (Out of the 39 counties in Washington State, only two counties
have lower rates (Franklin County with 1.4%, and Lewis County with 1.6%), and Whatcom County ties
Clallam County at 1.8%.)
Policy experts at the state Department of Commerce suggest an optimum rental vacancy rate is
around 6%. Our rental vacancy rate has dropped dramatically in a very short time:
Attachment A: Council Memo and Meeting Minutes
A-3
Because of the low rental vacancy rate (among other factors), many people are unable to find housing.
The City plans to conduct a housing needs assessment this year in order to assess the efficacy of
policies to address affordable housing and homelessness. However, we already know – both from
frequent anecdotal evidence and rental vacancy rate data – that we need to act now on addressing
affordable housing and homelessness in Port Angeles.
Councilmember Schromen-Wawrin drafted this ordinance to provide a quick way to get more
people housed, as many Port Angeles residents already have RVs or park trailers, which could be
appropriately sited and connected to water, sewer, and electric. Staff request Council direction on this
ordinance before dedicating staff time for review.
We all recognize that this ordinance is not a long-term solution to affordable housing in Port
Angeles. But it is potentially better than the current situation of many people sleeping in shelters, cars,
tents, or under tarps. This ordinance attempts to provide minimal barriers for temporary use permit
applicants – so that we can get more dwelling units in a matter of months (rather than years with new
permanent housing), and also because these are temporary use permits for temporary dwelling units. At
the same time, it recognizes the need for habitable dwellings that don't compromise health and safety.
This balance of policy goals is similar to state laws that provide alternative building code requirements
for temporary worker housing. See Chapter 70.114A RCW.
Funding Overview:
This ordinance creates an additional exemption, provided through temporary use permits, from
an existing prohibition on RVs and park trailers as dwellings. This ordinance would likely increase the
number of temporary use permits issued by the City, which would involve staff time. However, it may
also decrease the number of RVs and park trailers that do not conform to nuisance parking codes, or
illegally camp on city streets, which may decrease staff time involved in code enforcement.
Attachment A: Council Memo and Meeting Minutes
A-4
Proposed Ordinance
ORDINANCE NO. _____________
AN ORDINANCE of the City Council of the City of Port Angeles, Washington, providing for temporary use permits for temporary dwelling units during the current housing shortage.
WHEREAS, housing is a human right;
WHEREAS, housing provides stability for individuals and families, supporting self-reliance in
other areas of life, like health care and employment;
WHEREAS, Port Angeles, Clallam County, and Washington State generally, face an affordable
housing crisis;
WHEREAS, the lack of affordable housing presents a barrier to economic development,
because employers are hesitant to locate their businesses or expand their number of employees when
their employees cannot afford to live near their jobs;
WHEREAS, the lack of affordable housing contributes to homelessness, which puts homeless
individuals at health and safety risk, and homelessness has negative secondary impacts on other
residents, businesses, service providers, and taxpayers who pay more when people are homeless than
when people have housing;
WHEREAS, the state Department of Commerce's analysis concludes that a cause of this
affordable housing crisis is lack of housing units, and a solution is to build more smaller housing units;
WHEREAS, building housing takes time, both due to the construction process and the
availability of capital and qualified construction labor;
WHEREAS, we need creative and innovative short-term solutions to the affordable housing
crisis, to provide for housing while working on long-term solutions;
Attachment A: Council Memo and Meeting Minutes
A-5
WHEREAS, many people in Port Angeles already own temporary dwelling units, in the form of
recreational vehicles and recreational park trailers;
WHEREAS, these temporary dwelling units can be properly sited and connected to household
water, electricity, and side sewers, in order to provide habitable dwellings;
WHEREAS, these temporary dwelling units are already available as a source of housing and
could be available as affordable housing to relieve the affordable housing crisis while governments and
the private sector implement long-term solutions;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PORT ANGELES,
WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1 – Temporary Dwelling Unit Ordinance. Amendments to Sections 17.13.080 and
17.96.025 of the Port Angeles Municipal Code, and adding a new Section 17.96.074 (Temporary
dwelling units during housing shortages) to the Port Angeles Municipal Code, as follows:
17.13.080 – Trailers.
House trailers, automobiles, automobile trailers, mobile homes, park model manufactured homes,
boats, recreation vehicles, vacation trailers and campers used for residential purposes shall not be
permitted for occupancy in the City of Port Angeles except in approved trailer parks or as permitted by
sections 17.96.074 PAMC (Temporary dwelling units during housing shortages) or 17.956.06075
PAMC (temporary use permit).
17.96.025 – Nonresidential dwelling prohibition.
(A) House trailers, automobiles, automobile trailers, motor homes, mobile homes, park model
manufactured homes, boats, recreation vehicles, vacation trailers and campers shall not be used for
residential purposes in the City of Port Angeles except in approved trailer parks, the Port Angeles Boat
Haven (boats only), or as permitted by section 17.96.074 (Temporary dwelling units during housing
shortages) or section 17.956.06075 PAMC (Temporary Use Permit).
Attachment A: Council Memo and Meeting Minutes
A-6
17.96.074 – Temporary dwelling units during housing shortages.
(A) Purpose. This section provides for certain mobile structures, such as recreational vehicles
and recreational park trailers, to be dwelling units under temporary use permits during the current
housing shortage. The City recognizes that these structures are not permanent housing. However,
relative to dwelling in cars, tents, or other shelters, these structures can provide more security for
people who are otherwise unable to find permanent housing. Temporary use permits issued under this
section are intended to provide temporary relief from housing shortages, and people who use these
temporary dwelling units (both tenants and landlords) should be mindful that these dwelling units are
temporary, and should not expect permanent income or housing from these dwelling units.
(B) Ordinance expiration after three years.
(1) This ordinance is temporary and will expire on _________, 2021, three years from its
effective date. Temporary use permits issued under this section will continue until their individual end
date, without regard for the expiration of the ordinance itself.
(2) Prior to its expiration, and with enough time for the City Council to consider modifying the
expiration date of the ordinance, the City Manager shall present the City Council with a report of the
current status of rental vacancies and the housing shortage, how many temporary use permits have been
issued, renewed, and are currently in effect, and any issues with this ordinance that the City Council
should consider.
(C) Requirements for Temporary Use Permits.
The Director of the Department of Community and Economic Development may authorize a
temporary use permit for a temporary dwelling unit when:
(1) The structure that will be the temporary dwelling unit bears a valid insignia issued by
the Washington State Department of Labor and Industries per RCW 43.22.350 and Chapter 296-150P
or 296-150R WAC; is owned by one or more of the permit applicants; and complies with habitability
Attachment A: Council Memo and Meeting Minutes
A-7
laws, both the implied warranty of habitability and applicable rental law (see subsection (F) below);
(2) The permit applicant provides a plan for connecting the proposed temporary dwelling unit
with electricity, water, and side sewer connections, which need not be below-ground connections (e.g.
connections could include proper gauge electric cord from a house outlet, potable water hose from an
outdoor faucet, and a releasable attachment to a side sewer cleanout);
(3) The temporary dwelling unit is sited fully on the landowner permittee's property and
complies with setbacks, site location, number of vehicles, and other requirements in Section 8.30.060
PAMC (Parking of vehicles on residential property);
(4) The permitee shall allow the resident(s) of the temporary dwelling unit to use garbage and
recycling bins on the property;
(5) The permitee shall use the temporary dwelling unit as residential housing, not as a vacation
rental or short term rental as defined in Section 17.08.095(D) PAMC, and the permittee shall not use
any other property as a short term rental during the duration of the temporary use permit.
(D) The Director of the Department of Community and Economic Development may, but is not
required to, issue a temporary use permit for a temporary dwelling unit that does not meet all of the
criteria in subsection (C).
(E) The Director may provide the permitee with information on coordinated entry systems and
permanent housing options, and may require the permitee to provide this information to tenants.
(F) Permit Applicants and Applicable Rental Law.
(1) When the landowner is also the owner of the temporary dwelling unit structure, the
landowner shall be the permittee, and a lease of the temporary dwelling unit is governed by the
Residential Landlord-Tenant Act, Chapter 59.18 RCW, as if the structure is a “dwelling unit” as
defined by RCW 59.18.030.
(2) When the landowner is not the owner of the temporary dwelling unit structure, both the
Attachment A: Council Memo and Meeting Minutes
A-8
landowner and the temporary dwelling unit structure owner shall be the permitees, and the temporary
dwelling unit owner's lease of the landowner's property is governed by the Manufactured/Mobile Home
Landlord-Tenant Act, Chapter 59.20 RCW, as if the structure is a “manufactured/mobile home” as
defined by RCW 59.20.030.
(G) Temporary Use Permit included in rental agreement and posted on temporary dwelling
unit.
(1) A landlord who rents a temporary dwelling unit shall include a copy of the temporary use
permit for the unit as an attachment to the rental agreement (or if the rental agreement is not written,
the landlord shall still provide the tenant with a copy of the temporary use permit). A landlord shall not
rent the temporary dwelling unit for a period that extends beyond the expiration date of the temporary
use permit.
(2) The permittee shall conspicuously place the temporary use permit on the exterior of the
temporary dwelling unit, on or near the main door. The permitee shall also provide adjoining neighbors
with a copy of the temporary use permit.
(H) Permit Duration. Temporary use permits issued under this section are valid for twelve
months, provided the permitee(s) continue to meet the conditions in subsections (C), or conditions set
by the Director under subsection (D). Temporary use permits do not expire early even when this
ordinance expires.
(I) Permit Renewal. Permitees may renew temporary use permits up to four months before their
expiration, so long as the requirements in subsection (C) are still met, or as conditioned by the Director
under subsection (D). The renewed permit takes effect upon the expiration of the existing permit,
regardless of whether this ordinance has expired. Permit renewals are not subject to the limitations of
section 17.96.075(B) PAMC.
Section 2 – Severability. If any provisions of this Ordinance or its applications to any person or
Attachment A: Council Memo and Meeting Minutes
A-9
circumstances is held to be invalid, the remainder of the Ordinance or application of the provisions of
the Ordinance to other persons or circumstances is not affected.
Section 3 – Corrections. The City Clerk and the codifiers of this ordinance are authorized to
correct scrivener's/clerical errors, references, ordinance number, section/subsection numbers and any
references thereto.
Section 4 – Effective Date. A summary of this ordinance consisting of the title shall be
published in the City's official newspaper. This ordinance is subject to referendum and shall go into
effect thirty (30) days from the date of enactment.
PASSED by the City Council of the City of Port Angeles at a regular meeting of said Council
held on the ___ day of _______ 2018.
_________________________________
Mayor Sissi Bruch
ATTEST: _________________________________
Jennifer Veneklasen, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM: _________________________________
William E. Bloor, City Attorney
PUBLISHED: _____________________, 2018 By Summary
Attachment A: Council Memo and Meeting Minutes
A-10
Attachment A: Council Memo and Meeting Minutes
A-11
Attachment A: Council Memo and Meeting Minutes
A-12
Attachment A: Council Memo and Meeting Minutes
A-13
Attachment A: Council Memo and Meeting Minutes
A-14
1
Allyson Brekke
From:Lindsey Schromen-Wawrin
Sent:Thursday, August 16, 2018 11:28 AM
To:Allyson Brekke
Subject:Fwd: draft Temporary Dwelling Unit Ordinance
Attachments:2018-03-09 DRAFT Temporary Dwelling Unit Ordinance.docx
Acting Director,
Please include the email below (your choice on including the attachment) in the record for Planning Commission
consideration.
Thank you,
Lindsey
‐‐
Lindsey Schromen‐Wawrin
Port Angeles City Council
(360) 406‐4321
NOTICE: This email and any attachments may be subject to disclosure as a public record under the Public Records Act,
RCW Chapter 42.56.
‐‐
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Forwarded Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
Subject: draft Temporary Dwelling Unit Ordinance
Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2018 07:56:21 ‐0800
From: Lindsey Schromen‐Wawrin <lswawrin@cityofpa.us>
To: Nathan West <nwest@cityofpa.us>, Bill Bloor <Wbloor@cityofpa.us>,
Sissi Bruch <Sbruch@cityofpa.us>, Dan McKeen <Dmckeen@cityofpa.us>
Nathan, Bill, Sissi, and Dan,
I've been wrestling with how to provide some immediate policies to help address the affordable housing emergency (our
rental vacancy rate is now less than 2%, according to Serenity House's Housing Resource Center).
Most housing solutions work on time scales of years, rather than months.
The result of not having enough affordable housing is increased homelessness, which has serious consequences for the
homeless individual or family, as well as the whole community.
So yesterday I put together the attached draft of a Temporary Dwelling Unit Ordinance, which would allow for
temporary use permits during housing shortages, so that structures like camper trailers, RVs, mobile homes, and tiny
houses can be used for housing.
I'd appreciate your critical feedback.
Attachment A: Council Memo and Meeting Minutes
A-15
2
I'd be happy to meet to discuss it if that would be easier for you. This is still at the big concept stage and I could easily be
missing some major issues or policy considerations.
Thank you,
Lindsey
‐‐
Lindsey Schromen‐Wawrin
Port Angeles City Council
(360) 406‐4321 (voice and SMS texts (no MMS))
PUBLIC RECORD NOTICE: Please consider all written communications and voicemail messages sent to me or by me that
contain information that relates to the conduct of the City of Port Angeles, or the performance of any governmental or
propriatary function of the City of Port Angeles, to be a public record subject to disclosure under Chapter 42.56 RCW.
Attachment A: Council Memo and Meeting Minutes
A-16
1
Allyson Brekke
From:Lindsey Schromen-Wawrin
Sent:Thursday, August 16, 2018 11:21 AM
To:Allyson Brekke
Subject:Fwd: RE: L&I feedback on temporary dwelling unit draft ordinance
Attachments:Tiny Home handout v3.pdf
Acting Director,
Please include this email from Michael Luke at Labor and Industries in the record for Planning Commission's consideration.
Thank you,
Lindsey
--
Lindsey Schromen-Wawrin
Port Angeles City Council
(360) 406-4321
NOTICE: This email and any attachments may be
subject to disclosure as a public record under
the Public Records Act, RCW Chapter 42.56.
--
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Forwarded Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
Subject: RE: L&I feedback on temporary dwelling unit draft ordinance
Date:Mon, 16 Apr 2018 22:01:49 +0000
From: Luke, Michael (LNI) <lukm235@LNI.WA.GOV>
To: lswawrin@cityofpa.us <lswawrin@cityofpa.us>
CC: Mayo, Kelly (LNI) <mayx235@LNI.WA.GOV>, Daugherty, Shane B (LNI) <dauu235@LNI.WA.GOV>, Sedlacek,
Craig L (LNI) <SEDC235@LNI.WA.GOV>
Hello Lindsey,
Thank you for your inquiry. As I am sure you are already aware, the use and location of any of these RV's, or mobile
structures, is entirely under local authority. Washington State Labor and Industries (LNI) does not "permit" any of these
units in the typical context used by most jurisdictions.
For RV's and Park Model Recreational Vehicles (PMRV's) we do have a program that leads to the installation of our
insignia of approval, but this only applies to units that were originally built for sale, or lease, in Washington State. There
may be many units in your area that have been driven, or towed, in from other states that were not inspected under our
program. Please see the WAC's 296‐150R and 150P for additional information. Here are links to those WACs for your
convenience.
https://app.leg.wa.gov/wac/default.aspx?cite=296‐150P
Attachment B: Public Comment
B-1
2
http://apps.leg.wa.gov/wac/default.aspx?cite=296‐150R
Please note that the standards for these units is intended as a life safety standard only, and by definition they are only
intended for temporary living.
I have attached a document that we offer to folks inquiring about "Tiny Houses". I believe it may be useful to you as an
informational resource regarding LNI authority with different structures, including HUD certified manufactured homes,
and other recreational units.
Please let me know if I can be of additional assistance regarding our legislated authority over these units/structures.
Thanks much and I hope your day is a good one,
Michael Luke, CBO
FAS Plan Examiner
Phone: 360‐902‐5297
Fax: 360‐902‐5229
Washington State Department of Labor and Industries
Factory Assembled Structures/Specialty Compliance
PO Box 44430
Olympia, WA, 98504‐4430
My office hours are Monday through Friday 7:00 am to 3:30 pm.
________________________________________
From: Haynes, Jovanna V (LNI) on behalf of LNI RE Factory Assembled Structures
Sent: Monday, April 16, 2018 11:53 AM
To: Daugherty, Shane B (LNI)
Subject: FW: L&I feedback on temporary dwelling unit draft ordinance
‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐
From: Lindsey Schromen‐Wawrin <lswawrin@cityofpa.us>
Sent: Monday, April 16, 2018 6:38 AM
To: LNI RE Factory Assembled Structures <FAS1@LNI.WA.GOV>
Subject: L&I feedback on temporary dwelling unit draft ordinance
Hello L&I factory assembled structures department,
I'm a city councilmember in Port Angeles.
We're exploring a temporary dwelling unit ordinance that would allow for temporary use permits allowing for RVs and
other mobile structures to be residences during housing shortages.
A draft of the ordinance is attached.
I've referenced L&I permitting as a requirement for the temporary use permit ("The structure is permitted by the
Washington State Department of Labor and Industries"). But this permit process is not something I am familiar with. I'd
appreciate your feedback to help ensure this provision works and achieves its goal of making sure that these structures
are reasonably safe and habitable.
Thank you,
Lindsey
Attachment B: Public Comment
B-2
3
‐‐
Lindsey Schromen‐Wawrin
Port Angeles City Council
(360) 406‐4321 (voice and SMS texts (no MMS))
PUBLIC RECORD NOTICE: Please consider all written communications and voicemail messages sent to me or by me that
contain information that relates to the conduct of the City of Port Angeles, or the performance of any governmental or
propriatary function of the City of Port Angeles, to be a public record subject to disclosure under Chapter 42.56 RCW.
Attachment B: Public Comment
B-3
1
Allyson Brekke
From:Lindsey Schromen-Wawrin
Sent:Thursday, August 16, 2018 11:22 AM
To:Allyson Brekke
Subject:Fwd: RE: feedback request on draft Temporary Dwelling Unit ordinance
Acting Director,
Please use this version instead for the record from Tedd Kelleher (sending as HTML instead of the previous plaintext to
preserve embedded images).
Thank you,
Lindsey
‐‐
Lindsey Schromen‐Wawrin
Port Angeles City Council
(360) 406‐4321
NOTICE: This email and any attachments may be subject to disclosure as a public record under the Public Records Act,
RCW Chapter 42.56.
‐‐
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Forwarded Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
Subject: RE: feedback request on draft Temporary Dwelling Unit ordinance
Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2018 00:14:17 +0000
From: Kelleher, Tedd (COM) <tedd.kelleher@commerce.wa.gov>
To: lswawrin@cityofpa.us <lswawrin@cityofpa.us>
CC: Burgess, Emily (COM) <emily.burgess@commerce.wa.gov>, Nwankwo, Ike
(COM) <ike.nwankwo@commerce.wa.gov>, Simon, Jessica (COM) <jessica.simon@commerce.wa.gov>
Thank you for your interest in finding solutions to the affordable housing crises in our state. I have forwarded your
proposal to staff here at Commerce who work on Growth Management and related issues, who may have feedback on
proposal.
Regarding rental vacancy data, there are a number of credible sources that provide that sort of information, and some of
the best and most timely are local for‐profit real estate analysts that work with the local landlords to regularly survey
vacancy rates, which is helpful to landlords when setting rents and deciding on the viability of potential apartment new
developments. Those are the sorts of numbers often used in media accounts.
Attachment B: Public Comment
B-4
2
However, those private organizations are not something that should be cited in a law, because they are not consistent
and reliable. For example, the leading apartment data organization for the Puget Sound area (Dupre and Scott),
announced after Christmas that they were retiring, and not selling the business to others. The UW does produce data,
but in terms of something suitable for writing into a law I would recommend using:
The United States Department of Commerce, Census Bureau, American Community Survey, Rental vacancy rate
This data is updated annually (in September), and is available at the City level. Because Port Angeles is relatively small,
they only provide a "5‐Year Estimates," but that is a bit misleading in that they update it every year. It is actually a
running average of the last five years.
They do a new sample every year, but the sample in Port Angeles is too small to make reliable one‐year estimates from.
Because of the nature of the site, I cannot link directly to the relevant table for Port Angeles. Here is general link to the
relevant table:
https://factfinder.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.xhtml?pid=ACS_16_5YR_DP04&prodType=tabl
e
Here is a screenshot:
It actually shows a 7.5% rate at this point, but it does lag due to it being a five year average.
For Clallam County as a whole, the “1‐year estimate” is 1.8%. Since housing markets are regional and the data does not
lag, maybe the county rate as a whole would be better.
‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐
From: Lindsey Schromen‐Wawrin <lswawrin@cityofpa.us <mailto:lswawrin@cityofpa.us>>
Sent: Monday, April 16, 2018 4:41 AM
To: Burgess, Emily (COM) <emily.burgess@commerce.wa.gov <mailto:emily.burgess@commerce.wa.gov>>; Kelleher,
Tedd (COM) <tedd.kelleher@commerce.wa.gov <mailto:tedd.kelleher@commerce.wa.gov>>
Subject: feedback request on draft Temporary Dwelling Unit ordinance
Attachment B: Public Comment
B-5
3
Emily and Tedd,
I'm a Port Angeles City Councilmember working on a draft temporary dwelling unit ordinance that would provide for
temporary use permits for RVs as dwelling units during housing shortages. Attached is a draft of the ordinance, which
includes a little more description as well.
I was fortunate to hear you both speak at the Clallam County Homelessness Task Force last August, and to hear Tedd
speak at the Shelter Providers Network conference in Jamestown in November. Thank you both for the work you are
doing.
I would appreciate your general feedback on the attached draft ordinance.
Specifically, I'd like your help with the unfinished provision on how to determine when the rental vacancy rate is less
than six percent (see draft provision in attachment "When the rental vacancy rate {define geographic scope, measuring
agency, and measuring frequency} is less than six percent"). I'm unclear about how frequently this metric is measured
(I've found it quarterly, but haven't found it monthly), or whether it is measured at a scale smaller than Clallam County.
I'd appreciate any policy advice you could provide about making this an clear and effective provision.
Thank you,
Lindsey
‐‐
Lindsey Schromen‐Wawrin
Port Angeles City Council
(360) 406‐4321 (voice and SMS texts (no MMS))
PUBLIC RECORD NOTICE: Please consider all written communications and voicemail messages sent to me or by me that
contain information that relates to the conduct of the City of Port Angeles, or the performance of any governmental or
propriatary function of the City of Port Angeles, to be a public record subject to disclosure under Chapter 42.56 RCW.
Attachment B: Public Comment
B-6
1
Allyson Brekke
From:Lindsey Schromen-Wawrin
Sent:Thursday, August 16, 2018 11:33 AM
To:Allyson Brekke
Subject:Fwd: Re: feedback requested on draft Temporary Dwelling Unit ordinance
Acting Director,
Please include the below email in the record for Planning Commission consideration. I can send various versions if that
would be helpful for inclusion as well (The referenced attachments below are not included).
Thank you,
Lindsey
‐‐
Lindsey Schromen‐Wawrin
Port Angeles City Council
(360) 406‐4321
NOTICE: This email and any attachments may be subject to disclosure as a public record under the Public Records Act,
RCW Chapter 42.56.
‐‐
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Forwarded Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
Subject: Re: feedback requested on draft Temporary Dwelling Unit ordinance
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2018 10:41:21 ‐0700
From: Lindsey Schromen‐Wawrin <lswawrin@cityofpa.us>
To: Nathan West <nwest@cityofpa.us>, Sissi Bruch <Sbruch@cityofpa.us>,
Dan McKeen <Dmckeen@cityofpa.us>, Heidi Greenwold <Hgreenwo@cityofpa.us>
CC: Allyson Brekke <abrekke@cityofpa.us>, Kate Dexter
<katedexter2017@gmail.com>, Jennifer Veneklasen <Jvenekla@cityofpa.us>, Kari Martinez‐Bailey
<kmbailey@cityofpa.us>
Just an update on process:
Nathan asked that we see where the whole council stands on pursuing this ordinance before dedicating staff time to
reviewing the details. So I'll be modifying the "ask," from a request to conduct a first reading on May 1st, to something
more like:
"Recommendation: Request staff review of draft Temporary Dwelling Unit ordinance, and schedule first reading for the
May 15, 2018 meeting."
Thank you,
Lindsey
Attachment B: Public Comment
B-7
2
‐‐
Lindsey Schromen‐Wawrin
Port Angeles City Council
(360) 406‐4321 (voice and SMS texts (no MMS))
NOTICE: This email and any attachments may be subject to disclosure as a public record under the Public Records Act,
RCW Chapter 42.56.
‐‐
On 04/22/2018 07:23 PM, Lindsey Schromen‐Wawrin wrote:
> Nathan, Dan, Heidi, Sissi,
>
> I hope you had a good weekend!
>
> Please find attached an updated draft ordinance for Temporary Dwelling
> Units. There is a clean version attached, as well as a version with
> trackchanges since the April 14th version, which also includes some
> explanatory comments in the sidebar.
>
> Since the April 14th version, I've incorporated or considered feedback
> from Nathan, the Shelter Providers Network members, Department of
> Commerce, Department of Labor and Industries, Clallam County Code
> Enforcement and Environmental Health, Rob Feller (who represents
> McKinley on the UAC, and who spotted a loophole ‐ now fixed I think ‐
> in the vacation rental / short term rental provision), as well as some
> other individual citizen input. (I also submitted it to Ask MRSC, but
> have not heard back yet.)
>
> Dan and Heidi, I would appreciate input from city legal.
>
> I do plan to ask Dan or Sissi to place this draft ordinance in the May
> 1st agenda packet for a first reading. I'll submit another version to
> Jennifer on Wednesday before Noon for that purpose. I appreciate any
> further input (I'll be meeting with Nathan on Tuesday morning at 8:15
> to discuss further).
>
> Thank you all,
>
> Lindsey
>
> ‐‐
> Lindsey Schromen‐Wawrin
> Port Angeles City Council
> (360) 406‐4321 (voice and SMS texts (no MMS))
>
> NOTICE: This email and any attachments may be subject to disclosure as
> a public record under the Public Records Act, RCW Chapter 42.56.
> ‐‐
>
> On 04/14/2018 02:54 PM, Lindsey Schromen‐Wawrin wrote:
Attachment B: Public Comment
B-8
3
>> Nathan, Allyson, Sissi, Kate, Dan, Heidi, Jennifer, and Kari,
>>
>> I would appreciate your feedback on the attached draft ordinance to
>> provide for temporary use permits for temporary dwelling units during
>> housing shortages. There is a brief introduction in the attached
>> document. I plan to share this draft ordinance with the rest of the
>> City Council at our Think Tank on April 19th.
>>
>> If there are other city staff members whose feedback would be helpful
>> for this, please do forward it on or recommend that I share it with them.
>>
>> Nathan and Allyson, I'm particularly interested in your department's
>> feedback on interpretation, feasibility, vagueness, and general
>> implementability. I appreciated meeting with Allyson to discuss this.
>> I'd be happy to meet further if that would be helpful.
>>
>> Attached are two versions. There is a trackchanged version if you've
>> previously looked at the ordinance I distributed in March and want to
>> see the changes I've made since that earlier version. Otherwise,
>> there is a clean version with those trackchanges adopted.
>>
>> Thank you,
>> Lindsey
>>
Attachment B: Public Comment
B-9
1
Allyson Brekke
From:Gerry Kodad <gkodad@icloud.com>
Sent:Thursday, May 03, 2018 6:45 PM
To:Allyson Brekke
Subject:RV Dwelling permits
Dear Mrs.Brekke
I've been a Realtor, investor and general Cotractor for over 30 years.
Just a little example of my experience here last fall.
I have a 3bed 2 bath house in town I was trying to rent for $1100 a month.
I talked to 40 applicants ,took in over 20 applications over 2 months to find a couple with credit scores of low 600 and one had no rental history to eventually rent to.
Limited housing is only a small part of the problem. The majority of people who are looking to rent have evictions, bad credit, repositions, felonies or questionable migrant job histories.
I've seen first hand the large amount of people for such a small community transitioning from
half way houses and welfare that already gravitate to RV and Trailer life,and won't seek anything
else if that's made legitimate.
If this becomes the normalcy in Port Angeles,you will be forcing out actual investment and
taxpayers for the sake of the majority of whom are not personally responsible as I found in
dramatic fashion last fall.
The City council has also made it possible for hundreds of rentals to be turned into air B and B
Units, greatly impacting housing.
I heard the short sighted residents fighting for this plan to make a quick buck for themselves
not caring what the long term negative impacts are on the community, and taking these rights
Away again will not be easily done as investments in it will be done,and people will be
displaced.
As you know displacing people would case social outcry .
Attachment B: Public Comment
B-10
2
If this becomes the normalcy in Port Angeles, you will be forcing out actual investment and taxpayers for the sake of the majority of whom are not personally responsible as I found in
dramatic fashion last fall.
I know I am personally pausing investment plans with multiple properties until there is a reasonable long term beneficial decision made keeping the community stable on this issue.
I really hope you don't think neighborhood RV living is an option.
Thank you
Gerry Kodad
Attachment B: Public Comment
B-11
1
Allyson Brekke
From:Jennifer Veneklasen
Sent:Thursday, May 03, 2018 11:04 AM
To:Nathan West; Allyson Brekke
Cc:Dan McKeen
Subject:FW: RV proposal
Forwarding message sent to Council.
From: Terri Root [mailto:terri857@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, May 03, 2018 10:50 AM
To: City Council <council@cityofpa.us>
Subject: RV proposal
Please do not allow the proposal for people to live in RV's or campers on private property as a solution to our
housing shortage. It is no doubt a sincere idea but an absolutely disastrous one. Poorly thought out 'quick fixes'
have permanent negative repercussions. Consider the future of Port Angeles.Is a community of crowded, ramshackle neighborhoods what we want to become? How will Port Angeles attract teachers, physicians,firemen, law enforcement, businesses, college students, families and other citizens needed for
vibrant, healthy living without strong, attractive neighborhoods? Why invest in a home or community if at any
moment your property values are vulnerable to undermining? Please discard this ruinous proposal and instead
allow thoughtful consideration of more positive, forward-thinking options. Sincerely, Terri M. Root
Attachment B: Public Comment
B-12
1
Allyson Brekke
From:Jennifer Veneklasen
Sent:Monday, May 07, 2018 10:02 AM
To:Allyson Brekke
Subject:FW: RVs as "temporary" housing idea
From: DG and Rc [mailto:dgandrc51@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, May 04, 2018 8:07 PM
To: Lindsey Schromen‐Wawrin <LSwawrin@cityofpa.us>; City Council <council@cityofpa.us>
Subject: Re: RVs as "temporary" housing idea
Bureau of Labor Statistics' Employment Security regional labor economist Jim Vleming has been previously
quoted in the PDN.
Of the total 73,486 person Clallam County population, the labor force was at 27,290 in February 2014.
Perhaps new job creation and labor force figures are available from BLS. It would be valuable to know whether
employed people are primarily in need of housing or whether it is another segment of the population - i.e. which segment of the population will most benefit by a proposed RV dwelling ordinance?
On Fri, May 4, 2018, 6:17 PM Lindsey Schromen-Wawrin <lswawrin@cityofpa.us> wrote:
Rita,
I agree with you that the marginal increase in population seems
remarkable as a cause for this problem. Between 2010 and 2016 (according
to the US Census American Community Survey 1-year estimates for Clallam
County) the county population only increased by 3055 people. A little
over 1% growth.
But during the same time period, the number of total housing units only
increased by 469. Our new housing units are not keeping pace with the
population increase (and that is county-wide, not just in the city).
Also, during the same time period, we've lost 503 rental units with
gross rent less than $500, and we've lost 845 units with gross rent
between $500 and $999 - so a total decrease of 1348 rental units that
rent for less than $1000. (This data is pretty spiky though, so it
doesn't seem very reliable - see the attached spreadsheet of data that I pulled from the census).
The Department of Commerce has done more statistical analysis on the
issue, with some policy modeling on solutions. Here's a link to
presentation slides from last summer, http://blog.lindseyschromenwawrin.com/public/housing/DRAFT_Clallam_County_affordable_housing_and_h
omelessness_presentation_2017-09.pdf
Attachment B: Public Comment
B-13
2
I haven't looked up the number of new jobs in Clallam County during the same period. If you have that data handy, please do share it.
The City is working on a Housing Needs Assessment, which should give us
better statistics on the current housing issues. Thank you,
Lindsey
-- Lindsey Schromen-Wawrin Port Angeles City Council
(360) 406-4321 (voice and SMS texts (no MMS))
NOTICE: This email and any attachments may be subject to disclosure as a public record under the Public Records Act, RCW Chapter 42.56.
--
On 05/04/2018 05:50 PM, DG and Rc wrote: > Clallam County's population estimate in 2014 was 72,715. The > population grew *1.8 percent* from 2010, more slowly than that of the
> state at *5.0 percent*. Port Angeles is the largest city in the county
> with 19,256 residents. Its growth rate was *1.1 percent* since April
> 2010. > > Given those published stats, it's remarkable the a 1.1% population
> increase cannot be absorbed. Has there been a recent accelerated
> influx? There has not been a commensurate increase in the number of
> new jobs locally, so who accounts for the housing demand? HUD will not > offer assistance for the needy to live in personal property, i.e. RVs.
>
>
>
> On Fri, May 4, 2018, 5:31 PM Lindsey Schromen-Wawrin > <lswawrin@cityofpa.us <mailto:lswawrin@cityofpa.us>> wrote:
>
> Rita,
>
> We certainly are starting to look at how to get more permanent > housing.
> Unfortunately, those projects take years, and we're in the middle of a
> housing shortage crisis now.
>
> Nor will those projects necessarily be popular. For example, last year > Jefferson County residents voted down an affordable housing initiative
> that would have raised funds for more permanent housing.
>
> In terms of negative image issues, property values are better
> maintained > when people who are living in temporary situations are doing so
Attachment B: Public Comment
B-14
3
> legally. > See, e.g.,
> http://mynorthwest.com/141999/economist-if-order-is-maintained-seattles-new-homeless-camps-wont-
damage-property-value/
> Thus, I would rather have neighbors legally living in an RV, > rather than > illegal RV residents, or that random car being used as a residence
> down
> the street.
> > We need to relieve the current very low rental vacancy rate now, > to give
> ourselves time to raise funds and expedite permanent housing projects.
> Right now, the 1.8% rental vacancy rate is even an issue for
> people who > are moving here with full time jobs. No available housing is > hurting the
> economy, which is why affordable housing has become the state
> Department
> of Commerce's number one priority. > > Thank you,
> Lindsey
>
> -- > Lindsey Schromen-Wawrin > Port Angeles City Council
> (360) 406-4321 (voice and SMS texts (no MMS))
>
> NOTICE: This email and any attachments may be > subject to disclosure as a public record under
> the Public Records Act, RCW Chapter 42.56.
> --
>
> On 05/04/2018 05:15 PM, DG and Rc wrote: > > The HUD proposal specifies a recreational vehicle as one built on a
> > vehicular structure, not certified as a manufactured home, designed
> > only for recreational use and not as a primary residence or for
> > permanent occupancy.
> > > > If the RVs are allowed temporarily by City ordinance it is unlikely
> > the duration or nature of occupancy will be recorded or policed. The
> > City has enough negative image issues to overcome.
> >
> > Please spend time and effort on funding and expediting permanent > > housing rather than on this can of worms.
> >
> > Thanks again.
> >
> > > >
Attachment B: Public Comment
B-15
4
> > On Fri, May 4, 2018, 4:58 PM Lindsey Schromen-Wawrin > > <lswawrin@cityofpa.us <mailto:lswawrin@cityofpa.us>
> <mailto:lswawrin@cityofpa.us <mailto:lswawrin@cityofpa.us>>> wrote:
> >
> > Rita, > > > > Thank you for your comment.
> >
> > I absolutely agree with you that trailers and RVs shouldn't be
> > permanent > > dwellings. As you (and many other people) have pointed out, > they are
> > currently used as residences by many people, which is in
> violation of
> > city law. > > > > If we had sufficient available housing for people to find
> places to
> > rent, I would encourage that we take action to get people in
> proper > > housing. Unfortunately, with a 1.8% rental vacancy rate in > Clallam
> > County (the third lowest of any county in Washington, and lower
> > than the
> > I-5 corridor counties from Thurston north), we don't have > available > > housing and many people are priced out of their homes. Thus, the
> > rise in
> > illegal RV residences.
> > > > I hear you on the aesthetic of RVs; they certainly do not
> improve the
> > neighborhood. However, current city law allows people to park up
> > to two
> > RVs on their property already (see Port Angeles Municipal > Code Section
> > 8.30.060). This proposed ordinance doesn't change that
> current law
> > on RV
> > parking (although it does require that anyone who gets a > temporary use
> > permit to make the RV a legal temporary residence does properly
> > park the
> > vehicle in compliance with Section 8.30.060). The unfortunate
> > aesthetics > > of RVs around town are with us, since most of the aesthetic
> is the
> > structure, whether occupied or not. The question is whether
> we could
> > ease the affordable housing crisis by using those RVs as > temporarily
Attachment B: Public Comment
B-16
5
> > legal residences. I think that is better than illegal RV > > residences, as
> > well as people living out of their cars, tents, tarps, or
> shelters.
> > > > To clarify, HUD sets standards for mobile homes. The rule > revision
> > that
> > you mentioned is about HUD trying to better define the
> difference > > between RVs and mobile homes, as some RVs are now larger > than HUD's
> > current 400 square foot definition for the maximum size of
> an RV. See
> > the background section in the link you referenced. > > > > In Washington State, the state Department of Labor and
> Industries
> > (LNI)
> > inspects and certifies RVs and recreational park trailers > for life > > safety standards, and one of the requirements in the draft
> > ordinance is
> > that an RV have an LNI insignia. LNI does not, however regulate
> > the use > > and location of any of these RV's or mobile structures, > which LNI says
> > is entirely under local authority.
> >
> > If you have another authority for the assertion that "it > will remain
> > illegal to use an RV as as dwelling," please do let me know.
> >
> > Thank you,
> > Lindsey > >
> > --
> > Lindsey Schromen-Wawrin
> > Port Angeles City Council
> > (360) 406-4321 (voice and SMS texts (no MMS)) > >
> > NOTICE: This email and any attachments may be
> > subject to disclosure as a public record under
> > the Public Records Act, RCW Chapter 42.56.
> > -- > >
> > On 05/04/2018 03:18 PM, DG and Rc wrote:
> > > At this time, there are standards for RVS that are set by HUD
> > although
> > > there is a comment period which is currently open to > revise the
Attachment B: Public Comment
B-17
6
> > rule. > > > See
> > >
> > > https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=HUD-2016-0013-0001
> > > > > > It will remain illegal to use an RV as a dwelling. > > >
> > > My own neighborhood has many trailers or motor homes which
> were
> > to be > > > used as temporary dwellings. Ten years later (but who is > counting)
> > > they are quite permanently used as dwellings. They do NOT
> > improve the
> > > neighborhood. > > > > > > Picture this dwelling next to your house, then please drop
> this
> > notion.
> > > > > > Rita Cirulis > > >
> > >
> >
> > NOTICE: This email and any attachments may be subject to > > disclosure as a public record under the Public Records Act, RCW > > Chapter 42.56
> >
>
> NOTICE: This email and any attachments may be subject to > disclosure as a public record under the Public Records Act, RCW
> Chapter 42.56
>
NOTICE: This email and any attachments may be subject to disclosure as a public record under the Public Records Act, RCW Chapter 42.56
Attachment B: Public Comment
B-18
1
Allyson Brekke
From:Jennifer Veneklasen
Sent:Friday, May 04, 2018 3:24 PM
To:Allyson Brekke
Subject:FW: RVs as "temporary" housing idea
Attachments:20180504_100421.jpg
Should I cc Nathan on this type of correspondence, too?
From: DG and Rc [mailto:dgandrc51@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, May 04, 2018 3:18 PM
To: City Council <council@cityofpa.us>
Subject: RVs as "temporary" housing idea
At this time, there are standards for RVS that are set by HUD although there is a comment period which is
currently open to revise the rule. See
https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=HUD-2016-0013-0001
It will remain illegal to use an RV as a dwelling.
My own neighborhood has many trailers or motor homes which were to be used as temporary dwellings. Ten years later (but who is counting) they are quite permanently used as dwellings. They do NOT improve the neighborhood.
Picture this dwelling next to your house, then please drop this notion.
Rita Cirulis
Attachment B: Public Comment
B-19
Attachment B: Public CommentB-20
May 2, 2018
EGE [VE
JI'l I 2018
CITY OF PORT AN LES
CITY CL RK
The Honorable Sissi Bruch and Port Angeles City council Members
321 East Fifth Street
Port Angeles, WA 98352
Dear Mayor Bruch and Members of the City Council:
I am writing to you regarding the proposed legislation to allow recreationalvehicles as housing as
proposed by Councilman Shromen-Warwin. I spoke to you at the May 1, 2018 to voice my opposition to
this legislation and felt that I should follow up with a letter to further detail my concerns.
I heard many people speak regarding our homelessness crisis and lack of alfordable housing options.
What I did not hear is any concern for taxpayers and homeowners who are not being served by this
measure. Leading a community requires a balanced consideration for both sides of an issue; in this case,
balancing the needs of the homeless and those of property owners. l, for one, am extremely tired of
hearing how selfish it is for homeowners to consider themselves when people are sleeping in cars and
tents. I work very hard for my money, and I work very hard to maintain my home. I pay for the services
being used by our less fortunate community members and while I have no problem providing
reasonable accommodations, it is never enough money, never enough food, never enough. At some
point, we have to acknowledge there is no more to give. For me, this legislation is absolutely my line in
the sand.
Now we are proposing to move recreational vehicles onto properties for use as homes. Property owners
would be allowed to rent space to people with stickers on their vehicles, and they can hook into
residential electrical via extension cords, run hoses to them, and we aren't really sure what they will do
with the sewage (but I can give you some ideas). Neighbors would, of course, have no say in this.
Homeowners would not have the mechanism to run background checks on their tenants as so these
wild cards will be given an open door. On one hand, I hear that this legislation would allow people who
For several years, we have failed to meet the basic code enforcement needs of this city. This is no fault
of Nathan West and his dedicated staff. Rather, it is due to a lack of staffin8 for this problem. Port
Angeles is not alone. The county also has significant challenges with code enforcement due to lack of
funding for staff members. This had led to homeowners who refuse to mow their lawns, homes that are
falling down and rotting (leading to squatters and structure fires). We have active marijuana grow
operations in residential neighborhoods as growers purchase homes and turn them into commercial
operations. Neither police or code enforcement have the ability to address these issues, so they
continue. Although we have codes written prohibiting AirBnB type lodging, this is also pervasive. lllegal
ADUs, like the one next door to me, are rented out and we all fight for street parking leading to bad
feelings, resentment, and a general feeling of discomfort instead of peace in our homes and
neighborhoods.
Attachment B: Public Comment
B-21
Jo pua aql lv 'salllunurirlol AueuJ ur suaddetl stql'suralqold llatll a^los ol Aauou ueql pesu ul aldoad
aJou aJe aJaql 'pa^los aq lou llt/y\ sualqojd Jno sJea^ aalql u! leql ]]el aql punoJe sulls sttll Jo llv
'auop aq lllm Surqlou luauialJoJua apotr lnoqllrfl lnq ',sloqqSlau $ule8e slulelduol SulllJ,o uoltlsod
alqeJo^eJun eql u! sJoqqSlau slnd qltq^ 'auo ou 'elualJadxa Aul ul .leql elJolua ol Bulo8 s! oqn
'turlual lllqSru ro pualaam lou 'sleluar uJel tuollo, papualut st lesodold sltll:slelual u.lel-uoqs oN
'passed s! uorlels!tal slqt J! esJnof,el ou a^eq llrr\ leql sauo 3t!es aql 'sJeu/$oauloH .slaqleal
'sralq8uaru 'a,lod aloul roJ peeu aql lo] Aed lll,vr oq^ 'slsol paseaJlu! asoql ol 8ultllou alnq!.tluoJ
plnom slueuat asaql uq (tuerqll pue lood aql alll salllllleJ uotutxol Jo asn 'rledal laal$ 'slooqls 'St^l
'arrlod 'arU) aseaJlu! plno/y\ sal!ruas Jno uo aJnssald 'auou led plno^\ slueuel asaql:saxel AuadoJd
'auou a^eq ;;rryr s:oqq8rau lnq slueual se slqSu a^eq lllm Aaql al! asn aldoad o9 lnq uo palual sl
71g ue 1 uaddeq lltm leq,n lnoqe lq8noql no^ a^eH 'sruopu;m .ro p:eA rnol olu1 3ut1oo; slueual lo tullaa,
Aseaun aql turneq uoLll!/$ pa^ofua eq ol papua]ur are leql AIadoJd eql Jo seaJe alP alaql :slleqlas
'sJoqqBrau uaamlaq uorlei$nlJ 3rq e s,ll 'punoJe
Ise lnq 'aq lq8rur ll c/qtad punos 'auoq umo Jlaql Jo luolJ u! IJed louue, uosJad e uaqrvr s:oqqtlau
uaar$l,aq ssauluesealdun 1o 1o1 e lo, saleul ll 'laaJls aql uo IJed Alll eql u! sn 1o Aueyl :8u11je6
ellue8leula ue Euunp aldoad asaql puu slapuodsal 1s.tg lno ;;;m moH 'sal!ruas
Af,uatJaura Jo, pasn osle aJe sassalppv 'pa.rau!3a: lou lnq 'pooq.roqr{8lau lno u! aq lltrvr Aaql'ssa;auoq
aq ]ou 'llel ut lltr,i lnq
^a^tlap
;e.raua8,, .lo ssa;auoq se pa}sll aq llli\ aldoad asaq} os 'ssaJppe ue
e^eq lou llt^ salltqa^ leuolleallau 'ssaJppe lec;sAqd e arreq pue talsrEat ol paau srapuago xas :ssaJppv
alelrdsor{
aqt uo arnssatd aql lla]Je Aeu srql moq '&!suap paseaJlu! eql ql!/$ paleplsuoc noA aneg esallruas Sl l
pue alg aql.rol tut^ed aq salltqe^ leuollearf,al asaql llrr{r r,toH 'lem slql saleJ Alllln eseq pue al!ruas ll
crpa61 :no :ol Aed arri 'Alleuorllppv er\ou Allullala ll3s ol s:aumo Auado.rd rnolle o1 pa8ueql tulqlaulos
seH .pallnbal s! Jalaul eleJedas e os 'satltltln llas ol pa^\olle lou a:e slaumo AuadoJd :sallllln a1e.reda5
'af,!^Jas lleur pue saltlllln a1e:edas setl pue'PassarPpP sr AuadoJd aql'u1 q81am ol sroqqBlau
rrrrolle ol ssaroJd ltlqnd anp 'loj paluno::e 8ut1Jed laui aq lsnu qleqles 'Auedold e uo nov ue
la8 ol Japro ul 'leql Ja^o ;1e sdulo.tl uotle;srta1 stq-L'eaje paleuSlsap lad sllun tullla^^p X srnolle :8utuo2
:u/rlop slql leaJq sn la'l
'aslnotraJ
ou s! araql .sn Jol 'slslrl slql ol uau tu!^!l eau/$oauroq aql Jo] lou lnq '11t Alleluau aql'palllppe atll
.leu!ut!.lr aql lo, aq^en .Altuatedde 'sulalqoJd Jlaql a^los plnorr\ tulsnoq altr!tla^ leuo!}eaj:al ;o urelSojd
pale;ntatun uv.ssaleutoq aql8ulsnoq lnoqe s! stql '.AlleeJ os 'qo[ e pue auloq e uoq]lm eale ue ol a^oul
l,uplno,vr I tnq 'no^ lnoqe ,^oul l,uop | 'aldoad ssell tu!>1:or* ped lsou.l aql Jol 'aJe ulalsAs pasodotd
srql Bursn aldoad aql leql Aes ol snonuatulslp s! ll 'sanss! qlleaq leluaul pue'asn Snrp'fuolslq leulullJJ
:s;egua: 3u111a8 o1 sJallJeq lnoqP Jeaq | 'ujaql Jo, 3q p;noan ;esodold srql Inpapuo/t\ /t^oq pue uo11e;ndod
ssalatuoq ar{l }noqe s! uolssntslp aql ,laqlo aql uo pue Allunuoddo ue lJo/Y\ pue alaq a^oul ol lue^Attachment B: Public CommentB-22
three years, we all know that this will be a permanent situation. Without code enforcement and police
response, property owners will be left to deal with these messes on their own. lf the city is interested in
attracting high end employers and employees to this area (physicians), this will certainly give a person
moving here pause. I know that for me, this will hasten my exit from Port Angeles. I will take my skillset
and my husband's (a critical care and emergency nurse) to another community that supports its
homeowners.
Opening this door will bring many people to Port Angeles. Our unemployment rate is already double the
state average. ln three years, we will have people who have become reliant on the rent they receive
from this venture, and no alternative sites for the recreational vehicles to go. Three years will not solve
this problem. ln three years, the problem will be worse.
I am asking you to consider how to do this the right way. I am really tired of the point, shoot, aim
mentality. I don't want to be living in an active social experiment. Some cities are building RV and park
model home facilities. l've always told my staff that if they have a problem bring the problem to me with
two solutions. Living by my own word I offer you the following:
A park run by the city, rather like a marina, would be one way to manage this in a healthy way for all
involved. The facility(ies) could have showerl like state parks, laundry facilities, mail services, and allow
people to have outreach and social services available on site. lf this turns into another Seattle homeless
camp filled with urine bottles, needles, hepatitis, and crime, you can sellthe property and turn it into a
good RV park for a private business. Make sure the facility is centrally located and on a bus line. Require
rent or work in kind. Plan for an increase in the need for first responders and build that into the cost.
ln the meantime, hire two full time code enforcement officers. Require property owners to start
maintaining, to a basic level, their homes. Start enforcement activlties on the abandoned properties and
the illegal commercial businesses being run out of residences (grow operations, AirBnBs). Annex land
and begin zoning for appropriate multifamily housing. Work with developers to encourage development
of both high-end quality multifamily units and affordable units. Provide infrastructure and services for
those sites. Acknowledge that there will always be more demand than need here and everywhere in
Washington. We cannot meet all needs. Learn to say no. Sometimes no is the answer.
The proposed ordinance is unenforceable and puts additional, negative pressure on services and
neighborhoods and will decrease property values, increase crime, and raise costs without a means to
pay for them. Reconsider this ill-conceived idea. Your working class neighborhoods will bear the brunt of
this plan.
4u*lw
Heather Catuzo
John Barrett
229 W 13th street
Port AnSeles, WA 98362
Attachment B: Public Comment
B-23
1
Allyson Brekke
From:Jennifer Veneklasen
Sent:Thursday, July 12, 2018 11:07 AM
To:Allyson Brekke
Subject:FW: Travel trailers were not considered a safe housing option
From: DG and Rc [mailto:dgandrc51@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, July 11, 2018 5:11 PM
To: City Council <council@cityofpa.us>
Subject: Travel trailers were not considered a safe housing option
I hope the council has put this notion in the round file. Our Canadian neighbors rejected RVs as a safe housing
option.
Central Saanich's Woodwynn Farms fights 'no occupancy' orders | CHEK
https://www.cheknews.ca/central-saanichs-woodwynn-farms-fights-no-occupancy-orders-398205/
R. Cirulis
Attachment B: Public Comment
B-24
1
Allyson Brekke
From:Kari Martinez-Bailey
Sent:Monday, July 30, 2018 8:27 AM
To:Allyson Brekke
Cc:Nathan West
Subject:FW: motor homes parking on the street
FYI
From: Betsy Robins [mailto:brobins@wavecable.com]
Sent: Friday, July 27, 2018 7:00 PM
To: City Council <council@cityofpa.us>
Subject: motor homes parking on the street
Dear Council Members,
My friend is extremely concerned about a derelict motor home parked right in front of the walk
way to her home. She has heard that the council is considering an ordinance to allow on street parking for this type of vehicle as a temporary measure for alleviating Port Angeles' serious
housing shortage. Sanitation is a serious matter to consider. The motor home in front of her house
is not licensed and not driveable.
I can't imagine you will vote on such a scheme before thorough consideration of many alternatives
both for ways to relieve our communities' housing shortage and also for a ways to assist homeless
individuals.
I hope you can devise a reasonable plan to address the rental shortage and the homeless situation in
Port Angeles. I do not think allowing motor homes to park on the street for extended periods of
time is the answer.
I will look forward to a public presentation and hearing on the subject.
Thank you,
Betsy Robins
114 N Peabody St
Port Angeles, WA 98362
Attachment B: Public Comment
B-25
1
Kevin Bagwell
From:Allyson Brekke
Sent:Monday, August 20, 2018 10:25 AM
To:Kevin Bagwell
Subject:FW: Temporary Dwelling Unit ordinance.
‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐
From: Andrea Radich [mailto:andreasangels@msn.com]
Sent: Saturday, August 18, 2018 1:50 PM
To: Allyson Brekke <Abrekke@cityofpa.us>
Subject: Temporary Dwelling Unit ordinance.
Dear Ms. Allyson Brekke,
I am writing to let you know that support the Temporary Dwelling Unit ordinance as a viable temporary solution as we
work towards a more complete solution in Port Angeles.
Thank you,
Andrea Radich
501 W. 13th St.
Port Angeles
Sent from my iPhone
Attachment B: Public Comment
B-26
1
Kevin Bagwell
From:Allyson Brekke
Sent:Monday, August 20, 2018 10:56 AM
To:Kevin Bagwell
Subject:FW: affordable housing crisis
‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐
From: Carolyn Wilcox [mailto:carolyn@riseup.net]
Sent: Saturday, August 18, 2018 10:45 AM
To: Allyson Brekke <Abrekke@cityofpa.us>
Subject: affordable housing crisis
To the Port Angeles Planning Commission,
We are in the midst of an affordable housing crisis in Port Angeles. I moved to the city of Port Angeles in 2008 and lived
in various low‐income housing from rooms in houses, to mother‐in‐laws, and "shoe‐box" apartments. I have worked for
what is now NatureBridge, Olympic National Park, Port Angeles School District, and Peninsula College. Due to the
seasonal/intermittent nature of much of this work, I could never afford to buy a home. I have a Master's in Science but
struggled with housing issues. Even after I was married and we bought a small home (thanks to a generous seller and
monetary support from family), the struggles in trying to renovate an old Port Angeles bungalow have been challenging.
The city of Port Angeles needs to work towards replacing aging infrastructure, creating traffic calming streets, creating
bike and pedestrian boulevards, burying power lines, planting street trees, and making our community worthy of its
beautiful surroundings. There is a lot of work to be done and the city needs to lead us into a healthy future though
realizing that the status quo is not working, climate change is real, and change is needed.
We need to support the legislative branch of government in these new and bold plans. Those who are in the way, need
to get out of the way and accept that change might be messy but look around, people need a place to live. One can not
expect someone "to do something with their life"
without addressing their basic needs. We as a community have chosen to ignore this and send people to jail but this is a
failed system. Why not provide basic needs and encourage respect for all human beings. If we are going to pay for
people's basic needs either way (housing or jail), I pick housing. I would rather pay for housing on the front‐end and
have hope for the future than to send people to jail and give up on them. If we expect people to change then we need
to support change in ourselves and in our community.
Please support the temporary dwelling ordinance and use it as a stepping stone to a future where all humans have their
basic needs met.
Thank you,
Carolyn Wilcox
Port Angeles City Resident
Attachment B: Public Comment
B-27
1
Kevin Bagwell
From:Allyson Brekke
Sent:Monday, August 20, 2018 10:27 AM
To:Kevin Bagwell
Subject:FW: Support for affordable housing in Port Angeles
From: cmaier [mailto:cmaier@tfon.com]
Sent: Saturday, August 18, 2018 9:39 PM
To: Allyson Brekke <Abrekke@cityofpa.us>
Subject: Support for affordable housing in Port Angeles
Yes, I support affordable housing in Port Angeles.
Celeste Maier 1202 Water St.
Port Angeles, WA 98362
360-460-0913
Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone
Attachment B: Public Comment
B-28
1
Kevin Bagwell
From:Allyson Brekke
Sent:Monday, August 20, 2018 10:21 AM
To:Kevin Bagwell
Subject:FW: affordable housing
‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐
From: marshbop@olypen.com [mailto:marshbop@olypen.com]
Sent: Saturday, August 18, 2018 11:25 AM
To: Allyson Brekke <Abrekke@cityofpa.us>
Cc: Lindsey Schromen‐Wawrin <LSwawrin@cityofpa.us>
Subject: affordable housing
Hello,
I am a certified nurse‐midwife in practice for 34 years, the last 19 of those at Olympic Medical Center. I reside just
outside the city limits but am an employee of the hospital. I am in a group practices that cares for pregnant women and
delivers their babies at OMC.
I am seeing an alarming rise in housing instability among my lower income patients. Some of these women are
employed, or have stable partners with a job. It's no longer unusual for someone to be approaching their due date and
come to a routine prenatal appointment and tell me they have to leave their current housing and can't find anyplace to
go. Last week I saw a woman who is living in a tent in Sappho. She didn't offer this painful information, but there were a
few tip offs, like she smelled of wood smoke and had a P.O. box address. I was concerned about her nutrition, and
indeed she had only just recently acquired a cooler to keep some perishables in. (She taught me something I didn't
know: the wonderful WIC program, food coupons for pregnant women, infants and children, makes her buy milk in
gallon jugs, and to maximize it you have to get 3 at a time. Try that in your camping
cooler.) About a month ago I had a woman in labor who was still sorting out where they would be taking the newborn
home to, as they were trying to get out of their trailer that was just hooked up by one big extension cord that ran into an
outlet in someone's house.
We as a society are failing these vulnerable young families.
I don't have answers, but I think the proposal to allow rental of safe RVs with a careful permitting process might be
worth trying. People with more expertise than I have seem to think it will help a bit, and any dent we can make in this
serious problem is a step in the right direction.
I hope you will consider this carefully and decide to approve it.
Sincerely,
Deborah Bopp CNM, ARNP
2043 Monroe Road
Port Angeles, WA 98362
Attachment B: Public Comment
B-29
1
Kevin Bagwell
From:Allyson Brekke
Sent:Monday, August 20, 2018 10:22 AM
To:Kevin Bagwell
Subject:FW: support affordable housing
From: Elisabeth Hegyi [mailto:elisabethh@olypen.com]
Sent: Saturday, August 18, 2018 11:32 AM
To: Allyson Brekke <Abrekke@cityofpa.us>
Subject: support affordable housing
In general I do support, but only if it is guaranteed that the rules are enforced
and the situation will not become a burden to the neighborhood.
Elisabeth Hegyi
Attachment B: Public Comment
B-30
1
Kevin Bagwell
From:Allyson Brekke
Sent:Monday, August 20, 2018 10:28 AM
To:Kevin Bagwell
Subject:FW: Temp housing
‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐
From: Gerald Morris [mailto:gmorris@wavecable.com]
Sent: Saturday, August 18, 2018 11:52 PM
To: Allyson Brekke <Abrekke@cityofpa.us>
Subject: Temp housing
Dear Planing Commissioners,
I like the idea of allowing the use of RVs as temporary housing. The need for this idea to be implemented seems to be
great. I vote yes.
Thank you,
Gerald Morris, resident and citizen of Port Angeles.
Attachment B: Public Comment
B-31
1
Kevin Bagwell
From:Allyson Brekke
Sent:Monday, August 20, 2018 10:24 AM
To:Kevin Bagwell
Subject:FW: Affordable Housing needs in PA
From: Janet [mailto:janetmarx_76@msn.com]
Sent: Saturday, August 18, 2018 1:32 PM
To: Allyson Brekke <Abrekke@cityofpa.us>
Subject: Affordable Housing needs in PA
The lack of affordable housing in Port Angeles is a very real problem which reflects poorly on the city. Allowing the use of properly installed RV’s for temporary housing is at least a start toward addressing a problem which has been ignored for some time. Future planning should require more
middle and low income housing. Otherwise PA is no longer has a place for working class people and
will cater just to well-off retirees – a poor excuse for a community.
Janet Marx 112 Lockerbie Pl
Port Angeles, WA 98362
Virus-free. www.avast.com
Attachment B: Public Comment
B-32
1
Kevin Bagwell
From:Allyson Brekke
Sent:Monday, August 20, 2018 10:25 AM
To:Kevin Bagwell
Subject:FW: Proposal to rent RV's on private property
From: Katy Deutermann [mailto:saa3@juno.com]
Sent: Saturday, August 18, 2018 2:00 PM
To: Allyson Brekke <Abrekke@cityofpa.us>
Subject: Proposal to rent RV's on private property
I strongly object to the proposal to rent RVs sited on private property because you have no way to enforce
compliance. There is no Code Compliance Officer at this time in Port Angeles. I know this from
communicating with James Lierly regarding a disruptive property and filing a Nuisance Complaint Form. The
property behind ours at 1321 E 3rd St, Port Angeles, already has a cab-over camper sitting on the ground in the
owner's side yard visible from 3rd St, a huge tent behind it, and a medium sized travel trailer next to the garage. All of these are sometimes occupied. None are connected to water or sewer. There is an extension cord from the
garage to the travel trailer. There are also
____________________________________________________________ 1 Simple Trick Removes Eye Bags & Lip Lines in Seconds
ourhealthpros.com
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3132/5b7888e525d678e5458ast01vuc
Attachment B: Public Comment
B-33
1
Kevin Bagwell
From:Allyson Brekke
Sent:Monday, August 20, 2018 10:09 AM
To:Kevin Bagwell
Subject:FW: Temporary Housing Ordinance
‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐
From: camper@olypen.com [mailto:camper@olypen.com]
Sent: Saturday, August 18, 2018 11:11 AM
To: Allyson Brekke <Abrekke@cityofpa.us>
Subject: Temporary Housing Ordinance
Hi
I am writing in support of the ordinance but am unable to attend the meeting on the 22nd. Don't know if you are
keeping a plus and minus count but if so please put me in the plus section. Thank you,
Leslie Campbell
Port Angeles, WA
Attachment B: Public Comment
B-34
1
Kevin Bagwell
From:Allyson Brekke
Sent:Monday, August 20, 2018 10:26 AM
To:Kevin Bagwell
Subject:FW: Temporary use of RV's for housing
From: Lois Danks [mailto:lfdanks@yahoo.com]
Sent: Saturday, August 18, 2018 2:08 PM
To: Allyson Brekke <Abrekke@cityofpa.us>
Subject: Temporary use of RV's for housing
I support this plan. It is a sensible, temporary, and safe option to help
homeless people in our community. Although it is only a small step, it can
give people a chance to focus on improving their situation instead of
focussing on where they will be able to sleep at night and how to keep
themselves safe.
It offers a way to immediately help people without adverse effects on
neighbors and the community. With a safe place for themselves and their
belongings and access to water and electricity, and most of all with an
address where they can be reached, people can start to build a better
life.
This is what our community should be about- helping people live to their
highest potential!
I hope you will approve this plan and the City Council will pass it as
soon as possible.
Sincerely,
Lois F. W. Danks, a 35 year resident homeowner.
1621 South F Street
Port Angeles, WA 98362
Attachment B: Public Comment
B-35
1
Kevin Bagwell
From:Allyson Brekke
Sent:Monday, August 20, 2018 10:24 AM
To:Kevin Bagwell
Subject:FW: affordable housing
From: pat milliren [mailto:patmilliren@gmail.com]
Sent: Saturday, August 18, 2018 12:29 PM
To: Allyson Brekke <Abrekke@cityofpa.us>
Subject: affordable housing
I strongly encourage our city planning commission to consider a variety of short-term and long-term affordable
housing options for Port Angeles. I understand you will be considering an RV proposal this coming week. I
recognize that it has much to be discussed, but I hope you will accept the proposal on a short-term experimental basis at least.
I also hope that you would consider what could be done to the 5th Street nursing home that is sitting unused as a
low-income affordable or emergency housing option. What kind of grants might Port Angeles get (or what
taxes might we use) to make that space available for desperate folks without housing? It shouldn't sit vacant when there is so much need. What other vacant spaces might be renovated by Habitat or a city crew??
We need to work together as a city and county on this desperate issue. Bets wishes.
Pat Milliren
Attachment B: Public Comment
B-36
1
Kevin Bagwell
From:Allyson Brekke
Sent:Monday, August 20, 2018 10:27 AM
To:Kevin Bagwell
Subject:FW: Affordable Housing
‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐
From: Enviroclean [mailto:paul@envirocleannw.net]
Sent: Saturday, August 18, 2018 9:15 PM
To: Allyson Brekke <Abrekke@cityofpa.us>
Subject: Affordable Housing
Greetings. As a city resident, and business owner in the city I am strongly opposed to the city of Port Angeles to allow
RV to be short term dwellings in the city of Port Angeles
Reasons why I’m opposed
1. Public Safety A, Fire and first responders will be at greater risk of injury with the issue of a fire ,B pollution . Other
cities in the state are having issues.
2. Owner will not be able to get insurance on RV as housing in the state of Washington.
I’ve emailed the state insurance commission on this and have asked several insurance companies and found they will
not cover this.
3. The city should enforce code violations on the 300 air b b in the city that are in violation. These. Homes were family
dwellings that removed long term renters to allow more income as short term rentals.
I’m strongly opposed.
Very truly yours
Paul Collins
2452 Samara Dr
360‐670‐4595
Sent from my iPad
Attachment B: Public Comment
B-37
1
Kevin Bagwell
From:Allyson Brekke
Sent:Monday, August 20, 2018 10:32 AM
To:Kevin Bagwell
Subject:FW: Affordable Housing
From: Benjamin Komar [mailto:benjaminkomar@hotmail.com]
Sent: Sunday, August 19, 2018 2:06 PM
To: Allyson Brekke <Abrekke@cityofpa.us>
Subject: Affordable Housing
Hi there,
I won't be able to attend the Planning Commission meeting on Tuesday, but I do want the commission to
know that I support more affordable housing options in Port Angeles. Thank you for your consideration.
Benjamin G. Komar
1124 W. 9th St.
Port Angeles, WA 98363
(360)477‐0825
Attachment B: Public Comment
B-38
1
Kevin Bagwell
From:Allyson Brekke
Sent:Monday, August 20, 2018 10:33 AM
To:Kevin Bagwell
Subject:FW: Proposed Ordinance for temporary use permits for RVs as rentals
From: Ingrid Carmean [mailto:icarmean2@gmail.com]
Sent: Sunday, August 19, 2018 3:20 PM
To: Allyson Brekke <Abrekke@cityofpa.us>
Subject: Proposed Ordinance for temporary use permits for RVs as rentals
Yesterday I met a 73 year-old-gentleman whose retirement income is over $3,000 per month. He is homeless
and sleeping in his car. He has looked and cannot find housing. We need more options for housing. I support the
Proposed Ordinance for Temporary Use Permits for RV's as rentals. It won't solve everyone's housing needs but it will give some relief to the current housing crisis. It is a step forward.
Sincerely,
Ingrid Carmean
316 South Cherry
Port Angeles
Attachment B: Public Comment
B-39
August 19,20t8
To Allyson Brekke, Planning Manager
I am against the Temporary Dwellíng Unit Ordinance that was discussed at the City Council on May 1,
2018. Following are some of my questions and concerns:
1,. Who will supply the recreatíonal vehicles and recreational park trailers (RVs)
2. Will RVs meet current fire/safety requírements?
3. How willthese codes be enforced with limited stafffor Code Enforcement?
4. Potential fire and health threats to other neighborhood residents
5. Stormwater/sewage runoff contamination to the environment
6. Extra foot and vehicle traffic to property, parking availability
7. Location to other property boundary lines and streets, sidewalks, including any side extensions
of RVs?
8. Will neighborhoods be rezoned for multiple dwellings?
9. Storage and use of propane containers
10. Sink, shower, sewage disposal, water
LL. No use of outs¡de portable toilets
12. Noise suppression
13. Heater/stove vent locations to vegetation and other structures
14. Occupant limits to size of unit
1.5. Storage requirements for additional trash/recycle bins
L6. Willvalid comprehensive insurance be required?
17. Resale value of home adjacent to RV location
18. Quality of life for neighbors
19. Damage to neighbors' property
20. Pressure on current services
21. How will this affect my home/property insurance?
22. These types of vehicles are not desígned for long term continued use living spaces and should
not be used as a replacement for that, they break down very fast in that application
23. Turned into something other than intended purpose
24. Will neighbors have any part of whether or not a rental unít is placed next door?
25. W¡llthere be proper & humane pet/animal areas
ln Port Angeles the city and county already have a difficult time monitoring and enforcing current laws
and codes due to lack of funds and not enough people to do the job. Why would adding another burden
on this svstem be good for allthe taxpayers and home owners?
Thank you for your time
James Trekas
1938 Hamilton Way
Port Angeles, WA 98363
360-457-6846
olympicportalsproductions@gmail.com
AUû 2 0 2û18
&
Or \.f,A¡\
Attachment B: Public Comment
B-40
Attachment B: Public Comment
B-41
20r8AUG2O
irOir i
å¡r g{(orrJ
;l
Subscribe
Support
Past lssues
Commission hearing August 22
View this emaii,in youtbæwsgl
Translate -
Support affordable housing options in Port
Angeles by emailing the Planning Commission
now, and if possible attend the public hearing on
Wednesday, August 22nd.
Port Angeles, like many places, lacks available and affordable housing. Many say
we're in a housing crisis.
Next Wednesday, August 22, the Port Angeles Planning Commission is holding a
public hearing on a proposed ordinance to help provide more options in the short-
term. The proposed ordínance would allow one-year temporary use permits
authorizing property owners to use RVs as rentals when the RV is properly sited on
private property, connected to water, sewer, and electric, and meets Labor and
lndt¡stries life safety standards.
Please contact the Planning Commission by August 21 to express your support for
more affordable housing options in Port Angeles by emailing abrekke@cjtypfpa.us.
lf you can, please attend the Planning Commission meeting at city Hall on
Wednesday, August 22, at 6pm.
Details are below.
Thank you,
Lindsey Schromen-Wawrin
Port Angeles City Councilmember
The roots of the housing shortage
ln the most recent U.S. Census American Communities Survey, Clallam County had
a 1.$o/a rental vaæncy rate. That was lower than King County (at 2.7%) or Pierce
County {at 2.0%\ Of the 39 counties in Washington State, only two had lower rental
vacancy rates. (Data from census.gov dataset DP04 Selected F{ousing
Characteristics 2t16 American Community Survey 1-year Estimates) An ideal rental
vacancy rate is more around 6%, which allows tenants to find places to live and
landlords to balance their budgets.
htfnq'//mailnhi mnl¡lh?'t hÂQa4.4c'11et tnmrt-affn¡dahlchnt ¡eim-nntinnq-in-mrt-annclac-nlannin¡-cnmmic<inn-haarinn-¡r ¡nr rct-?1?a=,4,1r{7??o¡hh lta
Attachment B: Public Comment
B-42
8¡19t2018 Suppori affordable housing options in Port Angeles: Planning Conrmission hearing August 22
Subscribe Past lssues
7W6
Translate -
couldn't find a place to live. i've taiked to a nurnber tf people whs are new to Psrt
Angeles and have rome here with job in hand, but cannot find adequate housing.
Through Pro Bono lawyers, I have advised rnany people about housing issues who
are confined in their options by the housing shortaEe. lt's a public health isst¡e, and
an economic issue, and it's go¡ng to take a long time to sÛlve'
Policy analysts at the state Department of Commerce researched what is causing
this housing shortage and concluded that it is a supply and demand problem: there
are not enough smaller housing units to rneet the population demand, and thus rent
is increasing much faster than incomes. S¡nce 20A6, the median incorne has
increased 3%, but median rent has increased 18o/o. For the iowest Z9s/o of íncome
earners, their income is the same as ¡t was in 2û06 but their rent has increased 13Ya.
Rents are grow¡ng w¡th the economy, but
. t ¡¡ â | Im¡uole ¡f low lncome wrh i
fVledian re
+X.8%
,Median
ineorne
td!**!:t'q-¡êit¡b
rent
+13%
+!Yø .n#
¡tt4
{t}Eü
6
r{üco
rt
s
0,q¡co.C(,*
¿o.æ9Ë
¡5.tç6
tû-ütt{'
5-t09i
{t.ú1(,
-5.*tÁ
-.1û.0û96
-i5.ffitú
2æl ¿æ8 æ!0 ?o1r ¿01_2 JÐ13
Lcw ineornes (bottorn 20% sf households)+0-o4
D¿ia sor¡r¿es:r U.S. CÊrïsrìs B$r€Áu Ameriú¿n CÐmrtUni¿y Survey l-Yeaf Lslimttes; ¡nflötbn ¡djustsd U$ing th€ $l¡re¿¿¡ sf l¡bor Stðtigtics ePl-¡J"
Õ Oer"rt*ent of Comnrerce
{$se-the whole Dcpsümenlpf eam¡leic. pJesçalaüsn)
Br.¡t it's not as sirnple as just getting inconres up: ane nßadeLshÐlved thêllor eve-ry.
1%jnæass:ajncgmçå, rerf-gçeå up--1JA%. Just creating more or better jobs
h+rnc.//m:it¡hi mn/rth?lhRoO/.4c1lcr¡nnnri-affordahie-hn¡rqinc-ônfionç-¡n-nnrt-anncles-nlanninc-r'nmmissinn-hearino-auot¡st-22?e=41d7329clsb 2J8
Attachment B: Public Comment
B-43
8/191?a18 Support affordable housing opiions in Port Angeles: Planning Commission hearing August 22
Fast lssuesS*¡lrscríbe Translate -
Department of Commerce identified the drivers for increâsing rent as (1)jobs/people
rnûving into the state, {2) very lcw vacancy rates statewide, i3} construction industry
h*bbled by recessíon not eapable of rneeting demand, {4} local land use and other
regulatíons limiting the nunnber and types of unlts that can be built, and {5}
infrastructure not keeping pacê with growth.
The City is working on addressirrg the land use and regulatory bar¡"iers to affordable
hausing, as well as ¡nfrastrueture, but that wrrk all takes time" lt also takes time for
the constructitn industry to build new permanent hausíng units. Sa the long-ternr
sælt-¡tions - mûre permanÊnt affordable housing, particularly smaller housíng units -
are going to take a number of years.
Hornelessness & housirrtl
toolkit icr cities And it's not fike the City hasn't already been working on this
issue. We've reviewerJ the recommendations from the
Municipal Research Service Center and Association of
Washington Cities in their Homelegsness &- hçi¡síng too_llçit for
cities. We've already implemented a lot of those tools. Bt¡t
unfortunately, we still have a housing shortage.tllã
Meanwhile, our housing shortage is stifling local economic develcpment. Employers
are loosing their new hires because they can't find adequate housing" People are
loosing their housing because they cannot afford rent. We know what we need to do
for lang-term sok¡tíons, but it's going to take a long tirne to do it.
What do we do in the meantime
While cannpaigning for city council last year, I had a conversation with a Port
AngeNes resident, property ûwner, and contractor, wi-¡o warrted to hook an RV in his
backyard to utilitíes and rent it out. That's not currently allowed by the City's laws. lt's
not what we want long-term fsr hol.ising either, but when we look around for pfaces
fc:" peaple to live, the RVs that are ail over Pcrt Angeles are already here ín the
urban space, and are structures that can easily provide temporary dwellings.
I had another conversation wíth a mother of a disabled adult. She and her husband
are taking care of their sçn, but far a variety of reasons, they can't have him sleep in
the house. They are wcrking on a lcng-term option, but in the short-term, their
quality af lite would be a lot better if he could sleep in an RV in the backyard. They
are sure fhat their scn would be honneless *n the streets if he couldn't stay witt'r
¡:: Sdr& t!,'?.:
ttd<i6 i <i.r
\4^1'll6-itr\i e^rÁha4hqoolÅ^4 l-¡'*^^¿ -tr^r,{^hl^ h^r,¡in¡ ^ñ+i^hê ;h.h^* 4ñd¿lãê nl¡n¡ina ^^ãhíðê¡ôn hð-.íh^ -.t^t'ê+ raa^-Á{i7?oo^hh
Attachment B: Public Comment
B-44
8i19t2018 Support affordable housing opiions in Pori Angeles: Planning Commission hearing August 22
Subscribe Past lssues
Meanwhile, I've taiked with numerous professionals in town - employers and
employees - who struggle to find adequate housing even with a decent income.
RVs as temporary dwelling un¡ts seemed like a poss¡bility, so I started exploring the
idea in March. I discussed the idea with different groups, from the Port Angeles
Business Association's government affairs comm¡ttee, to the County's
Homelessness Tãsk Force and the Shelter Provider's Network, to the County Code
Enforcernent and Environmental Health Department, to state agencies at Labor and
lndustries (which licenses RVs) and Commerce, and with the City's planning staff.
I presented a draft ordinance to the rest of the City Council on May 1st, and the
Council voted to send the ordinance to city staff and the Planning Commission for
further review. The upcoming planning cornmission meeting on August 22 is the first
step of that Planning Commission review.
What the draft ordinance would do
The Temporary Dwelling Unit ordinance would allow property owners to apply for
one-year temporary use perrnits to allow an RV to be a dwelling unit if it meets
certain criteria, notably being properly parked on the private property, connected to
water, sewer, and electric, and habitable. The complete text of the proposal from
May 1st is available starting on PDF page 42 of the August 22 Planníng Commission
meeting-p¿cKst.
What kind of vehicles - life safety compl¡ance
"RV" in this summary is shorthand for "recreational vehicles and recreational park
trailers," which are two classifications of vehicles that the state Department of Labor
and lndustries issues compliance insignia showing that the vehicle has met life
safety standards. The Temporary Dwelling Unit ordinance would allow rlobile
structures that have Labor and lndustrles insignia to receive temporary tlse permits,
since this is an easy way to ensure that the state l"ras determined that the mobile
structure meets life safety standards. Practically, this means RVs purchased in
Washington State, although Labor and lndustries does have a process that people
can go through to get compliance insignia for other structures. There is an option for
City Staff to approve vehicles that don't have LNI insignia, but that is at Staff
discretion.
Who owns the RV
The temporary use applicant must own the RV. There are two options:
Translate v
htfnc./lmailnhi mn/¡lhllhÂAO/1a1lc¡rnmrf-affarr{ahl¿hn¡rcinn-nnfinnc-in-nnrt-ennalcc-rdanninn-cnmmiseinn-haarinn-¡¡ln¡¡qt-22?e=41t17?29,c-hh.41ft
Attachment B: Public Comment
B-45
s11 Í!¿01 B
r, Subscribe
Support afiordable housing options in Port Angeles: Planning Commission hearing Augusi 22
Past lssues Translate r
rent CIut the RV under the rules of the Residential Landlord Tênant Act, which
prCIv¡des protections for landlords and tenants.
When the RV owner and property owner are different people, then they both apply
for the temporary use permit, and their relationship would have to follow the rules of
the ManufacturedlMoþile Ho¡e Landlord:Ianant Act, which provides protections for
landlords and tenants in the context where the tenant may need extra time to move
their dwelling unit off the landlord's real property at the end of the tenancy.
The RV must be habitable, including connection to wateç
sewer, and electric
There are long-established rules about the condition of a dwelling unit that a landlord
rents to their tenants. Those rules would apply here too. ln addition, the RV must be
connected to water, sewer, and electric and the landlord must let the tenants use the
property's garbage and recycling containers.
The RV must be parked on pr¡vate property in
compl¡ance with current vehicle parking rules
The City already has laws concerning parking vehicles on residential property,
PAMC 8.30.060, and this ordinance would not change those rules at all. The RV
location must follow those parking rules, which means for most parcels that a
property owner could have up to two operable RVs parked in their back or side yard,
on an "improved or rnaintained surface," at least five feet from property lines and at
least three feet from structures.
It's important to note that this is the law now. A property owner in Port Angeles can
already park an RV on their lot five feet from their neighbor's property. The
Temporary Ðwelling Unit ordinance does not change that, it just allows an additional
exception (through a one-year temporary use permit) from the general rule
prohibiting someone from temporarily living in that RV.
Neighbor$ get notice
To rnake sure that everyone involved knows that the RV is a permitted temporary
dwelling unit, the permitee must provide adjoining neíghbors with a copy of the
temporary use permit, and post the permit on the exterior of the RV.
Not for vacation rentals
L*^^,//.-^i¡-&í .-hrJha4LaÕn/ t^41^.,^^^4 Æ^pÅ-hl^ h^':^;F^ ^61;^h^ ih h^* ^ñã^l^- ^l^*-i^^ ^^'.ñ;-é;^h h^^dna -ildtr-+ arÐ^-r 4A?t.ı^L,
Attachment B: Public Comment
B-46
8/19/2018 Support afiordable housing opiions in Port Angeles: Planning Commission hearing August 22
$ubscribe Past lssues
Temporary Use Permit duration
The temporary use permits will be valid for 12 months, and the ordinance will sunset
after three years without further Council action. This proposed ordinance is intended
to create temporary relief from the housing shortage" Landlords and tenants will
know that it is not permanent housing.
What about property values
One of the main arEuments people have put forward against the Tempçrary Dwelling
unit ordinance ls an assertion that il wiil decrease proper$ values. There is a lot of
rnisunderstanding about what affects property values, and particularly how
affordable housing or even government-subsidized housing affects property values.
Years of economic and social research that have found, as one advocary group
sumrnarized, "that slpportive and affordable housing did not lower, prop€rty values,
rgduce safety o': hurt the commun yjnilny way.."
While this research shows that a policy like the Temporary Dwelling Unit ordinance
isn't going to decrease property values, I understand people's concern here and take
it seriously, So one option I suggested as an arnendment to the proposed ordinance
is a "implernentation review" provision, which would temporarily suspend acceptance
of new temporary use permits afrer an initial threshold of permit applications, in order
for the City to evaluate the policy with some facts on the ground. Ferndale diel
something similar when it implemented its Accessory Dwelling Unit ordinance.
Why not just set up a city-run location
l-ots of cities are struggling with finding housing and shelter options for people who
do not have permanent housing. ln response, the United States lnteragency Council
on Homelessness published a four page document in May titled Caution is Needed
When Cqnsidering "sanctioned Encampments" or "Safe Zo This is a valuable
document for thinking through options for responding to the challenges of a housing
shortage. The document emphasizes that short-tenn options should help lead
toward permanent housing, and the irnportance of making sure temporary options
don't become permanent.
The Temp arary Dwelling Unit ordinance balances these issues by leveraging
existing structures and laws. RVs are available in our built environment today. I
already look out at my neighbor's RV from my home office; it would be a minor
aesthetic change if someone were living in it. The landlord-tenant relationship
Translate -
h+tne.l.lmoit¡hí ñ^/.{h"lh*OO/.zla,l/o:¡nmrt-¡ffnrdahla-hn¡rein¡-nniinnc-in-nnri-¡nnclac-nlanninn+nmmicqinn-hÊârind-âl¡drlct-?22p-=41d73?9a-htt 6/8
Attachment B: Public Comment
B-47
Sllg/2O18
i Subscribe
Support affordable housing options in Port Angeles: Planning Commission hearíng August 22
Past lssues
9-'a-a'
Translate'
tenancy. lndividual property owners get to decide who they rent to (as long as they
don't discriminate against a protected class of people), prospective tenants decide
whether they want to work with that landlord. ln most rentals, the govemment does
not need to be actively involved in management.
Solving the housing cr¡s¡s w¡ll take many solutions
The issues of housing availability, affordable housing, and homelessness are
complex. They intersect the economics of employment and real property. They are
intertwined with local, state, and federal laws. They don't exist in geographic
isolation from regional, national, and international demographic and economic
trends. They affect our homes (or lack of home) and are therefore issues that are
deeply personal. They determine who belongs and who doesn't belong. They
determine who gets to meet their basic needs for warmth and shelter. They
determine who lives and who dies.
ln addressing this complex issue, we can't assume that there will be one policy
solution. We need many tools, because we need many solutions, because ultimately
creating a community with sufficient available and affordable housing happens one
building at a time.
This proposed ordinance is not in lieu of other efforts, policies, and developments.
We need those too, because we need enough places for everyone in our community
to be able to call home.
Please prov¡de input to the Planning Commission
The Planning Commission needs to hear from people who understand the
importance of affordable housing and the need for innovative short-term options for
people who cannot find adequate housing.
By August 21, please email the Planning Commission via the Acting Director of
Community and Economic Development, Allyson Brekke, at abrekke@citysfp_a.us,
and let the Commission know that you support the Temporary Dwelling Unit
ordinance.
lf possible, attend the Planning Commission meeting on Wednesday, August 22nd,
at 6pm at City Hall and consider speaking at the public hearing on this ordinance.
Thank you for taking the time to understand this policy proposal and participating in
the process.
Attachment B: Public Comment
B-48
8t1gt201B Suppori affordabie housing opt¡ons in Port Angeles: Planning Commission hearing August 22
Subscribe Past lssues
Thank you,
Li ndsey Schromen-Wawri n
Councilrnember
City of Port Angeles
City website
cj1.¡dpa.!¿g
Contact rne direetly:
{3ô0) 406..4321
iswawru:@q!tySÍæus
Ccntaet the whole C*unci?:
csirnc-{@cllyslip-a-usândcily¡nen3gel@ç$yef p*A.Ug
$lrþscrjLe tq th ç ÇjJvs.f-Psll Ans gles-Ê ñrejlls.!å
lf you recei'red ihis email as a fon¡vard, pìease Sgþscrlbe-duçËtiy-g¿gly-g.rrêtiljgi
lf you are cn my email iisi, you r:an gp,dalç*yggltfelcleilc*ss or UirsUhfE!þpjfqryLthg li¡-l.
Translate -
hftne.//meifnhi mn/rlh?lhRQQ4/.a{/c¡¡nnnrf-¡ffnr¡la}rla-hnrrcinn-nnfinnc-in-nnrt-¡nnclec-nlannin¡+nmmic<iûn-hearinn-a¡tnltqf-??'le=41d7?2qa-hh 8i8
Attachment B: Public Comment
B-49
1
Kevin Bagwell
From:Allyson Brekke
Sent:Monday, August 20, 2018 10:34 AM
To:Kevin Bagwell
Subject:FW: RV rentals
‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐
From: Nik. Dolmatoff [mailto:jadolma@aol.com]
Sent: Sunday, August 19, 2018 3:44 PM
To: Allyson Brekke <Abrekke@cityofpa.us>
Subject: RV rentals
I am writing to express my opposition to the city council's proposal to allow rental of recreational vehicles on the
homeowner 's property as dwelling units. My objections are numerous, including but not limited to the following:
The proposal would require property owners to become amateur landlords, without understanding their rights and
responsibilities or those of their renters.
The proposal would presumably require enforcement of applicable laws by law enforcement, which would necessitate
redirection from an officer's primary duties.
The proposal makes no mention of how zoning restrictions would apply.
If this is truly to be a temporary measure, there should be a clear sunset date with a well‐designed and approved exit
plan.
Impact on the community must be considered, with approval of surrounding neighbors required of both the applicants
for tenancy and the limitations of their usage. I'm thinking of renters who think they can entertain guests (for example
during the daytime hours when the Salvation Army requires them to leave its facility).
Since the plan would be aimed at the disabled as well as the homeless and most RVs are not accessible, what
requirements for access would be placed on the homeowner?
In light of the number of for rent signs and obviously vacant low cost motels all over town, is there really a need for such
a measure?
In short, this is not a well thought out proposal and should not be approved by the Planning Commission.
Thank you.
Judith Dolmatoff
Attachment B: Public Comment
B-50
1
Kevin Bagwell
From:Allyson Brekke
Sent:Monday, August 20, 2018 10:35 AM
To:Kevin Bagwell
Subject:FW: Proposed Temporary Housing Ordinance
From: Richard Schneider [mailto:rchrdschndr@gmail.com]
Sent: Sunday, August 19, 2018 3:44 PM
To: Allyson Brekke <Abrekke@cityofpa.us>
Subject: Proposed Temporary Housing Ordinance
To Whom It May Concern:
I support the proposed ordinance permitting RVs to be used as temporary housing within the Port Angeles city limits, with the following reservations.
I suggest the matter of electric connections be addressed in more detail for these reasons:
Ordinary extension cords are inadequate for RVs' rated amperage, and are generally not intended or
rated for long-term use outdoors.
Standard household outlet circuits are inadequate for RVs' rated amperage. 30- and 50-amp circuits are
the standard; household circuits are 20.
Therefore RVs use heavy-duty cables with plugs that will not fit standard household outlets.
Homeowners or tenants may be tempted to modify approved, safe electric systems, or improvise, at
considerable risk to themselves, neighbors, guests, and firefighters.
A preventable fire or accident due to this cause would be a terrible tragedy. I urge that the ordinance require a
code-compliant electrical connection comparable to that found in RV parks, with underground routing and
industry-standard outlets.
As you know this ordinance is a stopgap measure pending the construction of more housing. Over two hundred housing units are needed immediately, just to cover last year's population increase at parity with 2016 vacancy
rates. This ordinance will be useless and in fact detrimental if the City does not effectively encourage and
promote that construction.
Sincerely,
/s/ Richard A. Schneider
123 Garling Rd.
Port Angeles, WA 98362
Attachment B: Public Comment
B-51
1
Kevin Bagwell
From:Allyson Brekke
Sent:Monday, August 20, 2018 10:36 AM
To:Kevin Bagwell
Subject:FW: Support affordable housing
From: Tara Demers [mailto:demerst13@gmail.com]
Sent: Sunday, August 19, 2018 9:18 PM
To: Allyson Brekke <Abrekke@cityofpa.us>
Subject: Support affordable housing
Hello,
Our community desperately needs more affordable housing options. I wholeheartedly support the proposed
ordinance sent forth by City Councilmember Lindsey Schromen-Wawrin that would allow property owners to use RVs as rentals.
Thank you,
Tara Demers
PA city resident
Attachment B: Public Comment
B-52
1
Kevin Bagwell
From:Allyson Brekke
Sent:Monday, August 20, 2018 11:43 AM
To:Kevin Bagwell
Subject:Fwd: Housing
-------- Original message --------
From: Barbara SLAVIK <barbaralslavik@yahoo.com>
Date: 8/20/18 11:24 AM (GMT-08:00) To: Allyson Brekke <Abrekke@cityofpa.us> Subject: Housing
I definitely Do Not support this!!
Sent from my iPad
Attachment B: Public Comment
B-53
1
Kevin Bagwell
From:Allyson Brekke
Sent:Monday, August 20, 2018 2:31 PM
To:Kevin Bagwell
Subject:FW: Affordable Housing
From: Beth Loveridge [mailto:bethloveridge@yahoo.com]
Sent: Monday, August 20, 2018 2:27 PM
To: Allyson Brekke <Abrekke@cityofpa.us>
Subject: Affordable Housing
I absolutely support more options for affordable housing. The problem is only getting worse and the City
should do whatever it can to alleviate the current problem and reduce future homelessness.
Beth Loveridge
140 Erving Jacobs Rd.
Port Angeles, WA 98362
Attachment B: Public Comment
B-54
1
Kevin Bagwell
From:Allyson Brekke
Sent:Monday, August 20, 2018 2:13 PM
To:Kevin Bagwell
Subject:FW: Living in RV’s
‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐
From: Bill Janis [mailto:billjanis@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, August 20, 2018 1:55 PM
To: Allyson Brekke <Abrekke@cityofpa.us>
Subject: Living in RV’s
Thanks for listening.
I left Port Townsend for this reason. Actually, just outside of Port Townsend. The street I lived on, Crutcher Road, started
getting worse and worse, as people lived more and more in RVs. People in neighborhoods that live in RVs do not care
about the neighborhood. They also do not have enough room to live inside the contraptions. This becomes a serious
problem, because many of their possessions are scattered around the RV. To make matters worse, often they played
music outside the RV, because again, there wasn’t enough room inside the RV to hang out. The RV is become completely
cluttered with all their possessions, that would fit normally in the house or full‐size apartment. This also forces them to
live on the outside of their house very often, hanging out all hours of the day and night. I sold my house so I would not
have to look at this or listen to it anymore. I hope that Port Angeles does not allow this, because it is a nightmare. It
ruins the neighborhood, and I don’t want to move again.
Thank you,
Bill Janis
914 S D St
Port Angeles, WA
Bill Janis
Attachment B: Public Comment
B-55
1
Kevin Bagwell
From:Allyson Brekke
Sent:Monday, August 20, 2018 10:55 AM
To:Kevin Bagwell
Subject:FW: affordable housing options in PA
From: Cassidy Grattan [mailto:cassidy.grattan@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, August 20, 2018 5:36 AM
To: Allyson Brekke <Abrekke@cityofpa.us>
Subject: affordable housing options in PA
i am a home owner in PA and have just read through councilmember Lindsey Schromen-Wawrin's plan for
expanded affordable housing options and I think it's a great idea. There is serious housing shortage in PA and I
think this plan is a good short term solution. There are already people living in RV's in PA we might as well make it safe and legit for them.
Thank you for your time,
Cassidy Grattan
1110 East Third St.
Port Angeles, WA 98362
Attachment B: Public Comment
B-56
1
Kevin Bagwell
From:Allyson Brekke
Sent:Monday, August 20, 2018 3:34 PM
To:Kevin Bagwell
Subject:FW: RVs as temporary housing.
From: Dick Pilling [mailto:rightguy@olypen.com]
Sent: Monday, August 20, 2018 3:26 PM
To: Allyson Brekke <Abrekke@cityofpa.us>
Cc: Lindsey Schromen‐Wawrin <LSwawrin@cityofpa.us>
Subject: RVs as temporary housing.
To whom it may concern,
I am given to understand that the planning commission meeting on 8/22/18 will address the use of RVs as “temporary”
housing for homeless people. The RVs would, apparently, be placed on private properties within the city to make
“affordable housing” available to those who are without a home.
I think that this is a lousy idea for a number of reasons….
“Temporary” is never “temporary”. If we allow this, it will become permanent and Port Angeles will quickly become
little more than a large trailer park.
The famous Field of Dreams comment, “If you build it, they will come”, would seem to apply here. Adding lower price
“temporary” housing will attract more “temporary” people. We don’t need more transients.
Dick Pilling
Dick Pilling
Managing Broker
Coldwell Banker Uptown Realty
Cell: 360 460 7652
Office: 360 417 2811
Email rightguy@olypen.com
Attachment B: Public Comment
B-57
1
Kevin Bagwell
From:Allyson Brekke
Sent:Monday, August 20, 2018 10:56 AM
To:Kevin Bagwell
Subject:FW: housing
From: Jim C [mailto:jinglejim@hotmail.com]
Sent: Monday, August 20, 2018 9:23 AM
To: Allyson Brekke <Abrekke@cityofpa.us>
Subject: housing
Greetings!
Our city is filled with illegal campers, trailers & RVS parked on city streets (both empty & occupied), some for
months and years.
If new permits are granted for use on private property I would like to see the current ordinance enforced. If
the city cannot or does not enforce the current code why create yet another?
I do support the proposed temporary use permits for RVs in Port Angeles.
Jim Couture
Attachment B: Public Comment
B-58
1
Kevin Bagwell
From:Allyson Brekke
Sent:Monday, August 20, 2018 4:38 PM
To:Kevin Bagwell
Subject:FW: RV housing ordinance
From: Karen Pritchard [mailto:karenp@olypen.com]
Sent: Monday, August 20, 2018 4:27 PM
To: Allyson Brekke <Abrekke@cityofpa.us>
Subject: RV housing ordinance
To Whom It May Concern:
I support this ordinance with one observation: who will enforce the removal of the RV at the end of 1 year? How will this be enforced? Is there a mechanism for enforcement that has teeth in it.
Thank you for your consideration.
Karen Pritchard
John L Scott Sequim
360-460-9973
karenp@olypen.com
Attachment B: Public Comment
B-59
1
To the Port Angeles Planning Commission and City Council August 20, 2018
Regarding the temporary dwelling unit ordinance
From Michele Mangiantini, 26 Walker Ranch RD, Port Angeles, 98363
The Port Angeles address where I reside is not in the city; however, my husband and I own six rental
homes within the city of PA. No vacancies at the moment.
I am addressing you today to voice my concerns and opinions against the RV ordinance proposal.
Beyond being a property owner/manager, I am an administrator of the Clallam County Rentals Facebook
page so I am very aware of what appears to be a shortage of rental homes in the county. There are far
more posts “in search of” a unit than there are units available, especially for those that have special
circumstances like pets they can’t part with. Frustrations are high and people are resorting to
unconventional living conditions. I understand all of that and I appreciate that the city is looking for
ways to fix these issues, but this temporary measure will not have the positive results that are being
sought, for several reasons.
Any course of action should include a support system to correct the issue of homelessness. There’s no
support or counsel in situations created by the proposed ordinance. There are no goals set, steps to take
or any kind of guidance on how to achieve that pathway out of a temporary homeless situation. With no
support, temporary becomes long-term.
The first line of defense against homelessness should be emergency housing. But with the lack of
funding we are without emergency shelters currently. A lot more people could be helped if we turned
our energy to finding the means to support emergency housing rather than catering to a few who want
permission to rent out their RV.
I am stung by the thought of our current code compliance issues. The city’s track record for dealing with
compliance violators is a nightmare for a neighbor seeking resolve. I have been involved with the current
code complaint process long enough to know that the complaint form hasn’t changed in a decade. Our
complaints about one neighboring homeowner have continued for longer than the six years I have been
keeping records. It started innocently enough with a few strewn lumber piles. And it grew to include
vehicles and RVs and so much hoarded junk to what it is today. Please see exhibit of photos #1. I bring
this to your attention to show that the city doesn’t have the ability to deal with non-compliant cases of
this magnitude that they have allowed to happen over time. I have done my part to submit complaint
forms accompanied with pictures making them aware. Now that it is so far out of compliance the city is
fighting for abatement but it is a long and expensive process that we are not winning and the city
doesn’t have a budget to pay for. We have lost renters here because of this out-of-control situation. Our
property value is way down for this home because of this blight next door. How is that fair to us that the
city can’t enforce the municipal codes as they are today? The proposal will only invite more of these
problems. Is the plan to neglect these issues for three years? What is priority? The process stopped
Attachment B: Public Comment
B-60
2
working when the city stopped working the process and the lack of results has resulted in distrust to the
point where people no longer use the process because it’s not working.
Please allow me to direct your attention to the attached photos in exhibits #2-5. These pictures are
neighboring properties of our rentals. Three out of six rentals have these RV’s within plain sight of our
homes as next door neighbors. And a sorry sight they are! If I do the math right, that’s 50% of our rental
homes that have RV vehicles to look at. These rigs can be huge! As an example, our RV (always stored in
the garage) is eleven feet tall and 30 feet long… Imagine your neighbor has one parked ten feet from
your living room window. With this ordinance that could become a reality. It would be a slap in the face
if a neighbor came to me with copy of a permit showing that the city gave them permission to shadow
my living room window without any recourse.
More often than not these rigs create additional parking problems for the neighborhood. I understand
that the proposal forbids them from parking on the streets as today’s code specifies but my point is the
city has trouble addressing these issues now. The PAPD says their hands are tied concerning parking
violators and the city says the same thing concerning the ones in code violation in front, side and back
yards. We should be looking for ways to untie their hands to give them the tools they need to set these
current violators straight. There is more to benefit from better managing our current issues than to add
more problems to the equation. If more than a single family is allowed to live on a single-family zoned
property it will be an invitation for more parking issues as there will be more cars, more noise issues as
there will be more noise and more animal issues as there will be more animals.
The resources required to be successful with this permitting program will tie up resources devoted to
other activities. The way this ordinance is written it seems the Economic Development will be given a
rubber stamp with no real direction. Who is going to make sure the water, sewer and electrical
connections are safe and sufficient? Aside from the permitting process this ordinance will require
enforcement of the rules, education of all involved and policing of violations. Today, there are
insufficient funds to fight compliance related abatement, there are no compliance officers on the payroll
and we have one part-time police officer who splits his time dealing with the entire city’s parking
enforcement and junk vehicles. I don’t think these resources come free or will be going away if this
proposal comes to be.
Who is going to make sure these units are habitable and stay that way? I understand the Economic
Development department will require units to have a Labor & Industries insignia. L&I will allow a
manufacturer to install an insignia on preapproved and documented models created/sold in
Washington. For RV’s and RPT’s that means they have given a rubber stamp that says the as-built
configuration meets standards of “temporary” living. However, once driven off the lot modifications can
be made which no authority is actively overseeing and accountability in upholding any kind of standard
is lost. What good is such an endorsement if there have been changes made that could quite possibly
compromise safety? Need a current endorsement? Too bad, we no longer have an L&I office on the
north peninsula; sorry. My real point here is that no one can rubber stamp these recreational vehicles
and trailers as safe for living in.
Attachment B: Public Comment
B-61
3
Speaking of safety… Above ground plumbing in winter can create unsafe conditions. Think about what
would happen if winter temperatures dropped below freezing for a week. Frozen water, frozen sewage
and overworked extension cords will lead to health and safety problems.
What criteria will be measured to determine program success/failure? We can’t seem to get accurate
and current vacancy rate information now. The numbers from the census that were quoted in this
proposal are not an accurate representation of the city but on outdated average for the county. That
1.8% number being used has been passed on by others as 1% in conversation when the actual number
created by the census for PA was 7.5% as I found during my own search for numbers. One number of
that census that stuck out at me was the high amount of vacant owner-occupied units reported in 2016.
If you ask me, I think the city needs to be more serious about code compliance and emergency shelter.
Then once we have a handle on those basics we can think about spreading out a little. This proposal is a
big can of worms that we would all be better off for not opening.
Thank you for your consideration,
Michele Mangiantini, dated 8/20/2018
Attachment B: Public Comment
B-62
4
Exhibit #1 Dogwood (photo 1 of 3)
Next door neighbor’s backyard.
They have a total of 5 vehicles, 4 RVs, a utility trailer and a boat… only 2 of those vehicles are properly
licensed.
Attachment B: Public Comment
B-63
5
Exhibit #1 cont. Dogwood (photo 2&3 of 3)
Next door neighbor’s side yard off Old Mill and front yard on the corner of Dogwood.
Attachment B: Public Comment
B-64
6
Exhibit #2 Madrona (2 photos)
Lots of vehicles and RV’s in front yards on this street
Attachment B: Public Comment
B-65
7
Exhibit #3 West 9th (2 photos)
One alley side neighbor has 4 boats, 1 RV and several other vehicles. Another neighbor has inoperable
vehicles and the house has been in a constant state of repair since we purchased next door 15 years
ago.
Attachment B: Public Comment
B-66
8
Exhibit #4 Juma Court
This cul de sac is very well kept with just one neighbor across 8th Street that shades a growing number of
vehicles.
Attachment B: Public Comment
B-67
9
Exhibit #5 West 15th
This next door neighbor has two inoperable vehicles stored in the alley.
Attachment B: Public Comment
B-68
10
Exhibit #6 Edgewood
This one I included as it is on the west end just inside city limits and I drive by this one daily. They have 4
operable vehicles and one not that is parked next to this roadside RV.
Attachment B: Public Comment
B-69
1
Kevin Bagwell
From:Allyson Brekke
Sent:Monday, August 20, 2018 2:31 PM
To:Kevin Bagwell
Subject:FW: RV housing opinion-Agree with allowing them
From: Racheal Turner [mailto:rachealturner74@yahoo.com]
Sent: Monday, August 20, 2018 2:24 PM
To: Allyson Brekke <Abrekke@cityofpa.us>
Subject: RV housing opinion‐Agree with allowing them
Hello,
I am writing with my opinion of the proposal to allow RVs on private property as a temporary housing fix.
I am a homeowner in the Port Angeles city limits.
I am in agreement with allowing RVs as rentals on private property.
1) It is our private property, we should be allowed to do with it what we want.
2) there is a known housing shortage in the area. This will help somewhat with the issue, and allow people to do it lawfully.
3) There should NOT be an age restriction on the year of the trailer (as some have openly requested in public social media
posts). Those looking for affordable housing such as this cannot afford new trailers (at 20K+ cost).
For one example, my daughter is a recent high school grad, working for Westport making good money for our area (well above minimum wage). She has great credit as well. She looked for over 6 months for rental with little luck. People either wanted
exorbitant rates ($1,000 plus for a run down studio dump), want you to have 3x the rent (she was willing to pay 1000 a month, but would of had to make a lot more money a month just to qualify per the owners standards), want 2+ years rental history in order to rent
a place, or be something that shouldn't be considered habitable. If you are new to renting, how are you supposed to get this history when EVERYONE was requiring it? We have plenty of room, so she has since decided to remain where she is (with us) and get
more education for a better job (while saving up money from work). She shouldn't have to resort to this. This housing crisis is going to send people like her (with great talent in their area of expertise) and send them out of the area.
I also work at the hospital. We need specialists to come into our area to fill empty positions that can't be filled locally. Unfortunately,
they can't find housing. We are loosing local talent due to housing costs/shortage/constraints and we are not able to recruit needed specialties/staff due to the same issues.
I also know of families living in motel rooms due to housing shortages. They are even on waiting lists for local subsidized housing,
but there is not any units available. We know that the new housing opening on Blvd will NOT alleviate this problem. It helps with a few new units when its all done, but won't do anything currently. And does not have enough new units being built to show any major
impact on the situation we have found our community in.
This is at least a temporary solution that will allow for these people to be housed for the time being. It's allowed in our few trailer parks (although several are not ones most people would even stay at), so why not allow 1 trailer per city lot?
Thank you,
Racheal Turner
Attachment B: Public Comment
B-70
To: Planning Commission
From: Councilmember Schromen-Wawrin
Date: August 20, 2018
Re: Proposed Temporary Dwelling Unit Ordinance
Planning Commission:
I want to provide you with additional background information on the housing issues and history
of the proposed Temporary Dwelling Unit ordinance, as well as provide responses to staff comments
that appear in your August 22, 2018, meeting packet.
I appreciate your consideration of this Ordinance, and look forward to working together on the
many issues we need to address.
Thank you,
Lindsey Schromen-Wawrin, Councilmember
Table of Contents
The Current Housing Shortage..................................................................................................................4
What do we do in the meantime.................................................................................................................6
What the draft ordinance would do............................................................................................................7
What kind of vehicles – life safety compliance....................................................................................7
Who owns the RV..................................................................................................................................7
The RV must be habitable, including connection to water, sewer, and electric....................................8
The RV must be parked on private property in compliance with current vehicle parking rules...........8
Neighbors get notice..............................................................................................................................8
Not for vacation rentals.........................................................................................................................8
Temporary Use Permit duration............................................................................................................9
What about property values.......................................................................................................................9
Why not just set up a city-run location......................................................................................................9
Solving the housing crisis will take many solutions................................................................................10
Responses to City Staff Comments in August 17 Staff Report................................................................10
Public Safety & Crime.........................................................................................................................11
Real Estate & Property........................................................................................................................14
Utilities................................................................................................................................................16
Questions on Proposed Ordinance Language......................................................................................18
Three Year Plan Concerns...................................................................................................................21
Permits.................................................................................................................................................22
Code Enforcement...............................................................................................................................23
Councilmember Schromen-Wawrin 1 of 21
Attachment B: Public Comment
B-71
The Current Housing Shortage
In the most recent U.S. Census American Communities Survey, Clallam County had a 1.8%
rental vacancy rate. That was lower than King County (at 2.7%) or Pierce County (at 2.0%). Of the 39
counties in Washington State, only two had lower rental vacancy rates. (Data from census.gov dataset
DP04 Selected Housing Characteristics 2016 American Community Survey 1-year Estimates) An ideal
rental vacancy rate is more around 6%, which allows tenants to find places to live and landlords to
balance their budgets.
Beyond the statistics, we know anecdotally that it is really hard to find a place to live here. Even
a new employee at the City had to delay his start date because he couldn’t find a place to live. I’ve
talked to a number of people who are new to Port Angeles and have come here with job in hand, but
cannot find adequate housing. Through Pro Bono lawyers, I have advised many people about housing
issues who are confined in their options by the housing shortage. It’s a public health issue, and an
economic issue, and it’s going to take a long time to solve.
Policy analysts at the state Department of Commerce researched what is causing this housing
shortage and concluded that it is a supply and demand problem: there are not enough smaller housing
units to meet the population demand, and thus rent is increasing much faster than incomes. Since 2006,
the median income has increased 3%, but median rent has increased 18%. For the lowest 20% of
income earners, their income is the same as it was in 2006 but their rent has increased 13%.1
1 See Department of Commerce presentation slides available at
http://blog.lindseyschromenwawrin.com/public/housing/DRAFT_Clallam_County_affordable_housing_and_homelessn
ess_presentation_2017-09.pdf.
Councilmember Schromen-Wawrin 2 of 21
Attachment B: Public Comment
B-72
But it’s not as simple as just getting incomes up: one model showed that for every 1% increase
in incomes, rent goes up 1.74%.2 Just creating more or better jobs doesn’t fix this problem. Jobs are
important for sure, but the limiting factor right now is housing availability.
Department of Commerce identified the drivers for increasing rent as:
(1) jobs/people moving into the state,
(2) very low vacancy rates statewide,
(3) construction industry hobbled by recession not capable of meeting demand,
(4) local land use and other regulations limiting the number and types of units that can be built, and
(5) infrastructure not keeping pace with growth.
The City is working on addressing the land use and regulatory barriers to affordable housing, as
well as infrastructure, but that work all takes time. It also takes time for the construction industry to
build new permanent housing units. So the long-term solutions – more permanent affordable housing,
particularly smaller housing units – are going to take a number of years.
And it’s not like the City hasn’t already been working on this issue. We’ve reviewed the
recommendations from the Municipal Research Service Center and Association of Washington Cities in
their Homelessness & housing toolkit for cities.3 We’ve already implemented a lot of those tools. But
unfortunately, we still have a housing shortage.
Meanwhile, our housing shortage is stifling local economic development. Employers are
loosing their new hires because they can’t find adequate housing. People are loosing their housing
because they cannot afford rent. We know what we need to do for long-term solutions, but it’s going to
take a long time to do it.
What do we do in the meantime
While campaigning for city council last year, I had a conversation with a Port Angeles resident,
property owner, and contractor, who wanted to hook an RV in his backyard to utilities and rent it out.
That’s not currently allowed by the City’s laws. It’s not what we want long-term for housing either, but
when we look around for places for people to live, the RVs that are all over Port Angeles are already
here in the urban space, and are structures that can easily provide temporary dwellings.
I had another conversation with a mother of a disabled adult. She and her husband are taking
care of their son, but for a variety of reasons, they can’t have him sleep in the house. They are working
on a long-term option, but in the short-term, their quality of life would be a lot better if he could sleep
2 http://experimental-geography.blogspot.com/2016/05/employment-construction-and-cost-of-san.html.
3 http://mrsc.org/getmedia/4785af3e-35c7-42ef-8e8e-a44c8d0786c4/Homelessness-And-Housing-Toolkit-For-
Cities.pdf.aspx?ext=.pdf.
Councilmember Schromen-Wawrin 3 of 21
Attachment B: Public Comment
B-73
in an RV in the backyard. They are sure that their son would be homeless on the streets if he couldn’t
stay with them.
Meanwhile, I've talked with numerous professionals in town - employers and employees - who
struggle to find adequate housing even with a decent income.
RVs as temporary dwelling units seemed like a possibility, so I started exploring the idea in
March. I discussed the idea with different groups, from the Port Angeles Business Association’s
government affairs committee, to the County’s Homelessness Task Force and the Shelter Provider’s
Network, to the County Code Enforcement and Environmental Health Department, to state agencies at
Labor and Industries (which licenses RVs) and Commerce, and with the City’s planning staff.
I presented a draft ordinance to the rest of the City Council on May 1st, and the Council voted to
send the ordinance to city staff and the Planning Commission for further review. The upcoming
planning commission meeting on August 22 is the first step of that Planning Commission review.
What the draft ordinance would do
The Temporary Dwelling Unit ordinance would allow property owners to apply for one-year
temporary use permits to allow an RV to be a dwelling unit if it meets certain criteria, notably being
properly parked on the private property, connected to water, sewer, and electric, and habitable. The
complete text of the proposal from May 1st is available starting on PDF page 42 of the August 22
Planning Commission meeting packet.4
What kind of vehicles – life safety compliance
“RV” in this summary is shorthand for “recreational vehicles and recreational park trailers,”
which are two classifications of vehicles that the state Department of Labor and Industries issues
compliance insignia showing that the vehicle has met life safety standards. The Temporary Dwelling
Unit ordinance would allow mobile structures that have Labor and Industries insignia to receive
temporary use permits, since this is an easy way to ensure that the state has determined that the
mobile structure meets life safety standards. Practically, this means RVs purchased in Washington
State, although Labor and Industries does have a process that people can go through to get
compliance insignia for other structures. There is an option for City Staff to approve vehicles that
don't have LNI insignia, but that is at Staff discretion.
4 Temporarily available at http://cityofpa.us/DocumentCenter/View/5927/2018-08-22-PC-Agenda-Packet.
Councilmember Schromen-Wawrin 4 of 21
Attachment B: Public Comment
B-74
Who owns the RV
The temporary use applicant must own the RV. There are two options:
When a property owner also owns the RV, that person can apply for a temporary use permit to
use the RV as a temporary dwelling unit. The property owner could then rent out the RV under the
rules of the Residential Landlord Tenant Act, Chapter 59.18 RCW,5 which provides protections for
landlords and tenants.
When the RV owner and property owner are different people, then they both apply for the
temporary use permit, and their relationship would have to follow the rules of the
Manufactured/Mobile Home Landlord-Tenant Act, Chapter 59.20 RCW,6 which provides protections
for landlords and tenants in the context where the tenant may need extra time to move their dwelling
unit off the landlord’s real property at the end of the tenancy.
The RV must be habitable, including connection to water,
sewer, and electric
There are long-established rules about the condition of a dwelling unit that a landlord rents to
their tenants. Those rules would apply here too. In addition, the RV must be connected to water,
sewer, and electric and the landlord must let the tenants use the property’s garbage and recycling
containers.
The RV must be parked on private property in compliance with
current vehicle parking rules
The City already has laws concerning parking vehicles on residential property, PAMC
8.30.060,7 and this ordinance would not change those rules at all. The RV location must follow those
parking rules, which means for most parcels that a property owner could have up to two operable RVs
parked in their back or side yard, on an “improved or maintained surface,” at least five feet from
property lines and at least three feet from structures.
It’s important to note that this is the law now. A property owner in Port Angeles can already
park an RV on their lot five feet from their neighbor’s property. The Temporary Dwelling Unit
5 Available at http://apps.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?Cite=59.18&full=true.
6 Available at http://apps.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=59.20&full=true.
7 Available at https://library.municode.com/wa/port_angeles/codes/code_of_ordinances?
nodeId=TIT8HESA_CH8.30NU_8.30.060PAVEREPR.
Councilmember Schromen-Wawrin 5 of 21
Attachment B: Public Comment
B-75
ordinance does not change that, it just allows an additional exception (through a one-year temporary
use permit) from the general rule prohibiting someone from temporarily living in that RV.
Neighbors get notice
To make sure that everyone involved knows that the RV is a permitted temporary dwelling
unit, the permitee must provide adjoining neighbors with a copy of the temporary use permit, and post
the permit on the exterior of the RV.
Not for vacation rentals
The proposed ordinance would not allow the RV to be a vacation rental, nor allow the property
owners to move into the RV and use their house as a vacation rental.
Temporary Use Permit duration
The temporary use permits will be valid for 12 months, and the ordinance will sunset after
three years without further Council action. This proposed ordinance is intended to create temporary
relief from the housing shortage. Landlords and tenants will know that it is not permanent housing.
What about property values
One of the main arguments people have put forward against the Temporary Dwelling Unit
ordinance is an assertion that it will decrease property values. There is a lot of misunderstanding
about what affects property values, and particularly how affordable housing or even government-
subsidized housing affects property values.
Years of economic and social research that have found, as one advocacy group summarized,
“that supportive and affordable housing did not lower property values, reduce safety or hurt the
community in any way.”8
While this research shows that a policy like the Temporary Dwelling Unit ordinance isn’t
going to decrease property values, I understand people’s concern here and take it seriously. So one
option I suggested as an amendment to the proposed ordinance is a “implementation review”
provision, which would temporarily suspend acceptance of new temporary use permits after an initial
8 Yes In My Backyard, Research and Policy, available at http://www.yesinmybackyard.ca/research-and-policy/.
Councilmember Schromen-Wawrin 6 of 21
Attachment B: Public Comment
B-76
threshold of permit applications, in order for the City to evaluate the policy with some facts on the
ground. Ferndale did something similar when it implemented its Accessory Dwelling Unit ordinance.9
Why not just set up a cityrun location
Lots of cities are struggling with finding housing and shelter options for people who do not
have permanent housing. In response, the United States Interagency Council on Homelessness
published a four page document in May titled Caution is Needed When Considering “Sanctioned
Encampments” or “Safe Zones.”10 This is a valuable document for thinking through options for
responding to the challenges of a housing shortage. The document emphasizes that short-term options
should help lead toward permanent housing, and the importance of making sure temporary options
don’t become permanent.
The Temporary Dwelling Unit ordinance balances these issues by leveraging existing
structures and laws. RVs are available in our built environment today. I already look out at my
neighbor’s RV from my home office; it would be a minor aesthetic change if someone were living in
it. The landlord-tenant relationship provides benefits to both parties, and landlord-tenant laws provide
rules that people are familiar with for allowing someone else to live in their property, and for ending
the tenancy. Individual property owners get to decide who they rent to (as long as they don't
discriminate against a protected class of people), prospective tenants decide whether they want to
work with that landlord. In most rentals, the government does not need to be actively involved in
management.
Solving the housing crisis will take many solutions
The issues of housing availability, affordable housing, and homelessness are complex. They
intersect the economics of employment and real property. They are intertwined with local, state, and
federal laws. They don’t exist in geographic isolation from regional, national, and international
demographic and economic trends. They affect our homes (or lack of home) and are therefore issues
that are deeply personal. They determine who belongs and who doesn’t belong. They determine who
gets to meet their basic needs for warmth and shelter. They determine who lives and who dies.
In addressing this complex issue, we can’t assume that there will be one policy solution. We
need many tools, because we need many solutions, because ultimately creating a community with
sufficient available and affordable housing happens one building at a time.
9 Ferndale Municipal Code 18.34.070(I), available at
https://www.codepublishing.com/WA/Ferndale/#!/Ferndale18/Ferndale1834.html%2318.34.070.
10 Available at
https://www.usich.gov/resources/uploads/asset_library/Caution_Sanctioned_Encampments_Safe_Zones_052318.pdf.
Councilmember Schromen-Wawrin 7 of 21
Attachment B: Public Comment
B-77
This proposed ordinance is not in lieu of other efforts, policies, and developments. We need
those too, because we need enough places for everyone in our community to be able to call home.
Responses to City Staff Comments in August 17 Staff
Report
Staff comments are repeated in full in italics. My responses are below each comment in
plaintext. Please note that I received these staff comments for the first time in the Planning
Commission’s August 22, 2018 meeting agenda.
I used bold font where suggesting an alteration to the May 1, 2018, version of the draft
ordinance.
Public Safety & Crime
1. A physical address must be placed on a temporary dwelling in order for proper
response times in cases of emergency for the fire, police and ambulance.
Add a provision such as “For emergency response, a physical address (e.g., “123 1/2”) must
be placed on the temporary dwelling unit, in a location directed by the City or otherwise visible
from the main egress.”
Note that the United States Postal Service does not appear to allow a separate mailing address in
this situation. The Postal Operations Manual provides different delivery options depending on whether
a “mobile or trailer home” development is permanent or transient, as determined by the Postal Service.
POM 631.461. The Operations Manual section on Transient Mobil or Trailer Home Developments
reads in full:
Transient developments are mobile home, trailer, and recreational vehicle parks where the
lots are temporarily occupied or rented and considered transient, short-term, or seasonal,
even though some families may live in them for extended periods. For these developments,
the only option is delivery to a single point or receptacle designated by park management
and approved by local Postal Service managers for the receipt of all mail and subsequent
distribution or mail forwarding by employees of the park. This method is also available for
permanent developments.
POM 631.463.11
11 This text is based on a 2012 update, available at http://about.usps.com/postal-
bulletin/2012/pb22334/html/updt_001.htm#ep1459084. The link from that update webpage to the full POM (see bottom
of update webpage) was not functioning on August 19 when I composed this response, and I was not able to locate a
full version of the updated POM to verify the text that is currently in effect.
Councilmember Schromen-Wawrin 8 of 21
Attachment B: Public Comment
B-78
Thus here, the temporary dwelling unit is probably not eligible for a separate mailbox.
Temporary dwelling unit residents would receive mail through the established address at the property,
and/or an off-site post office box.
2. Smoke detectors must be located in each unit.
State law requires smoke detectors installed in all dwelling units occupied by persons other than
the owner, or built or manufactured in Washington after 1980. RCW 43.44.110(1).
Also, one of the temporary use permit requirements is a Department of Labor and Industries
(LNI) insignia. To get that insignia a recreational vehicle or recreational park trailer must include
smoke detector (as well as “CO detector location, [and] LP detector location.”).12
In addition, smoke detectors are built into the requirements for rentals. The Residential
Landlord-Tenant Act requires landlords provide notice of compliance with RCW 43.44.110, cited
above, and inform tenants of their responsibility to maintain the device. RCW 59.18.060(12)
(landlord’s duties); RCW 59.18.130(7) (tenant’s duties). The Manufactured/Mobile Home Landlord-
Tenant Act does not reference smoke detectors, although the official code provides a note referencing
RCW 43.44.110. See Chapter 59.20 RCW.
Based on the above existing laws, in almost all circumstances, a temporary dwelling unit will be
required to have a functional smoke detector under one or more rules. The exception would be an
owner-occupied temporary dwelling unit built before 1981 that received LNI insignia before LNI
required smoke detectors in RVs and recreational park trailers (whenever that was, probably a long
time ago). This doesn’t seem likely, but the requirement could still be made express in the proposed
ordinance if this is a concern.
3. The RCWs and WACs that are referenced seem to only apply to manufactures and
dealers that insure when a RV is sold, it meets the L&I compliance codes. This is fine if the
RV that someone plans to use for their temporary dwelling unit is new or no more than five
years old, but what about the RV structures that that much older and would likely not pass an
acceptable living inspection. What will the inspection process look like for these temporary
dwelling units? It seems it would be a major liability to the person allowing an older RV to be
on their property and used for temporary housing if something was to occur, such as fire or
CO2 poisoning.
Yes, one of the requirements for the temporary dwelling unit is that it has LNI compliance
insignia showing that it meets life safety standards, among other requirements. LNI only issues this
insignia for vehicles originally built for sale or lease in Washington.
12 See PDF page 18, paragraph 3, of
http://www.lni.wa.gov/TradesLicensing/FAS/files/RecreationalVehiclesCompletePacket.pdf or
http://www.lni.wa.gov/TradesLicensing/FAS/files/RecreationalParkTrailersCompletePacket.pdf.
Councilmember Schromen-Wawrin 9 of 21
Attachment B: Public Comment
B-79
Michael Luke from LNI wrote, “There may be many units in your area that have been driven, or
towed, in from other states that were not inspected under our program.”13 Those units would not be
eligible to be temporary dwelling units under the proposed ordinance, because they fail to meet the LNI
insignia requirement in proposed-PAMC 17.96.074(C)(1).
That said, the proposed ordinance does have a separate requirement provision that allows the
Director of Community and Economic Development to waive one or more of the requirements in
proposed-PAMC 17.96.074(C). Subsection D of the same proposed section states in full: “The Director
of the Department of Community and Economic Development may, but is not required to, issue a
temporary use permit for a temporary dwelling unit that does not meet all of the criteria in subsection
(C).” This provision could allow, for example, a new RV that was purchased out-of-state to be a
temporary dwelling unit even though it does not have LNI compliance insignia.
It is entirely up to the Director to decide when to use the requirement exception provision in
proposed-PAMC 17.96.074(D), and what the inspection process would be prior to issuing a permit
under subsection D authority.
4. We need to consider public crime in this scenario. Some in the community look down
upon the homeless and vagrancy has its own negative implications. So people may not be
happy to now have what they deem as unsavory characters living in RVs within their
neighborhoods. This is not to say that everyone living in this situation is bad, but the potential
for crime increases are possible. This then could potentially increase call volume to the Police
Department and heavier dispatch rates to this areas because of neighborhood complaints.
Research shows crime rates do not increase around affordable or supportive housing. For
example, a 2008 study in Toronto of two supportive housing buildings for people with mental illness
(similar to some of the facilities Peninsula Behavioral Health manages in Port Angeles) found:
There is no evidence that the existence of the supportive housing buildings studied has
negatively affected either property values or crime rates in the neighbourhood. Property
values have increased and crime decreased in the period considered by the study.14
But as this study noted, there is frequently active opposition to supportive and affordable housing,
usually couched in a hypothetical concern over crime and property values.
Our role as civil servants and community leaders is to present a vision for an inclusive
community that meets the needs of all people in Port Angeles. We should respond to hypothetical
concerns with research and evidence.
13 Original email from Michael Luke in Planning Commission August 22, 2018, meeting agenda, PDF page 13, available
temporarily at http://www.cityofpa.us/DocumentCenter/View/5927/2018-08-22-PC-Agenda-Packet.
14 Alice de Wolff, We Are Neighbours: The Impact of Supportive Housing on Community, Social, Economic and Attitude
Changes, Wellesley Institute 2008, available at http://www.wellesleyinstitute.com/wp-
content/uploads/2011/11/weareneighbours.pdf.
Councilmember Schromen-Wawrin 10 of 21
Attachment B: Public Comment
B-80
5. How are background checks for individuals who are applying for permits performed, to
ensure lower criminal rates or intrusions into certain areas? (eg. Sex offender being too close
to a school).
Washington law prohibits individuals who have committed certain sex offenses from living
within 880 feet of schools. RCW 9.94A.703(1)(c); RCW 9.94A.030(6) (definition of “community
protection zone”). These individuals are already required to register with local law enforcement, and
that registration includes “complete and accurate residential address or, if the person lacks a fixed
residence, where he or she plans to stay.” RCW 9A.44.130(1), (2). Registering individuals must
provide change of address notification to law enforcement. Id. at (5)(a). Failing to register is itself a
crime. RCW 9A.44.132.
Clallam County Sheriff’s Office currently reports 16 people registered as sex offenders in and
around Port Angeles. I assume, but have not confirmed, that the Sheriff’s Office verifies registration
address with school proximity, however I did not locate the law or procedure requiring that verification
while drafting this response.
The proposed ordinance does not include additional background check requirements for
temporary use permit applicants. As noted above, state law addresses this issue. Landlords can choose
to run background checks for prospective tenants.
Real Estate & Property
1. Will this impact the sales of neighboring properties?
Any answer here is speculative, however research on how affordable housing affects property
values shows that property values usually either increase or stay the same when new affordable housing
comes into the neighborhood. A recent article discussing opposition to affordable and supportive
housing (referred to as “NIMBY” in this excerpt) summarized some of these findings, although none of
these studies look at dwelling units analogous to the Temporary Dwelling Unit ordinance authorized
dwellings. :
Most studies have found that affordable housing does not depress property values. Of 31
studies that examined whether non-market housing hurt surrounding property values in
California, one recorded a negative impact; 19 found no discernable effect, and seven
documented rising property values (the others were inconclusive).
As long as 20 years ago, the B.C. government undertook a study to address NIMBY
concerns by tracking seven social housing projects across the Lower Mainland, Vancouver
Island, and the Interior. In each case, neighbours didn’t want the project to happen because
they worried property values would take a hit.
Over five years, appraisers reviewed sale prices in nearby homes and compared them to a
controlled area. They found that prices near the projects increased as much as — or more
Councilmember Schromen-Wawrin 11 of 21
Attachment B: Public Comment
B-81
than — houses in the control area. There was no evidence the property values were
negatively impacted by nearby social housing.
A University of Minnesota study even found that a property gained US$86 in value for
every 30 metres closer it was to well-managed, non-profit, multi-family subsidized housing.
Research also suggests that low-income housing developments can reduce the risk of crime,
rather than add to it, according to the National Homeless Initiative.
Between 1997 and 2006, a Toronto neighbourhood around supportive housing facilities saw
dispatched emergency calls fall 27 per cent, an 11.5 per cent decrease in assaults, and
sexual assaults drop by almost a third, according to a Wellesley Institute report.
Vancouver Coastal Health stated in 2007 states that a review over 25 years had uncovered
no evidence that “there has been an increase in crimes in areas around [supportive housing]
buildings.” Neighbours made few complaint calls about the projects.
Indeed, NIMBYism may be self-defeating: a report by the National Homelessness Initiative
found that when community opposition to housing the homeless succeeded, it actually
created more crime, by cutting down the number of options for people who would
otherwise have resided and received care in the proposed facilities.15
While these studies look at different kinds of affordable housing than what is proposed by the
Temporary Dwelling Unit ordinance, we can look at an even more transient and temporary case study
to support the hypothesis that permitted RVs on private property as temporary dwelling won’t
negatively impact property values. In regard to a city-sanctioned homeless camp in the Ballard
neighborhood in Seattle, a real estate economist went on the record saying it will not impact home
values.16
Nevertheless, regardless of the merits of these concerns, there is a community perception about
property value risks associated with the Temporary Dwelling Unit ordinance. In response to these
concerns, I suggest adding an “implementation review” provision to the proposed ordinance, so
that after the City has issued 10 temporary use permits, new permits are suspended while the
effects of the temporary dwelling units are evaluated, for a short period of time, in order to
correct any deficiencies or unanticipated issues with the policy.17
15 Stefania Seccia, Yes! In My Backyard! A commitment to neighbourliness eases resistance to new supportive housing
(Jan. 25, 2017), available at http://www.megaphonemagazine.com/yes_in_my_backyard.
16 Kipp Robertson, Economist: If order is maintained, Seattle’s new homeless camps won’t damage property value,
MyNorthwest (Nov. 2, 2015), available at http://mynorthwest.com/141999/economist-if-order-is-maintained-seattles-
new-homeless-camps-wont-damage-property-value/.
17 I suggested this addition in an email to the incoming City Manager and the Acting Director of Community and
Economic Development on July 24, 2018, referencing a similar procedure used by the City of Ferndale when
implementing its Accessory Dwelling Unit ordinance, see
https://www.codepublishing.com/WA/Ferndale/#!/Ferndale18/Ferndale1834.html%2318.34.070.
Councilmember Schromen-Wawrin 12 of 21
Attachment B: Public Comment
B-82
2. How does this impact neighbor’s view shed?
Existing Port Angeles parking requirements already allow two RVs to park outside on a single
property. PAMC 8.30.060(G).18 The Temporary Dwelling Unit ordinance requires vehicles park in
compliance with this ordinance. Thus, neighbors’ view sheds are not likely to be affected more than
they already are by RVs.
There is the potential for the Temporary Dwelling Unit ordinance to increase the incentive to
have an RV on private property, and thus this additional RV might impact view sheds. However, there
is significant up-front cost to create a proper parking spot, connect to sewer, and other requirements for
receiving a temporary use permit. Adding the purchase of an LNI-compliant RV to these connection
and parking expenses would probably not be economical given the temporary use permits last for only
one year and under the proposed law are able to be renewed for, at most, three years. See proposed-
PAMC 17.96.074(B), (H), (I).
3. How is minimum access to each unit, in terms of space from other dwellings on the
site, guaranteed with the temporary use permit process?
Existing Port Angeles parking requirements on private property require vehicles be parked 5
feet from property lines, and 3 feet of unobstructed-space from other structures, when able to be parked
in the side yard or rear yard. PAMC 8.30.060(A)(1). This ordinance does not have similar setback
requirements for parking in the front yard, however, front yard parking is only allowed where alley
access is unavailable. Id. at (B).
Given the lack of unobstructed-space requirement in the existing code for front yard parking,
we should add a provision in the proposed Temporary Dwelling Unit ordinance, so that proposed-
PAMC 17.96.074(C)(3) reads: “The temporary dwelling unit is sited fully on the landowner permittee's
property, has at least six feet of unobstructed-space along the entrance-side of the unit , and
complies with setbacks, site location, number of vehicles, and other requirements in Section 8.30.060
PAMC (Parking of vehicles on residential property);” (bold is additional suggestion).
4. We also need to take into consideration the potential effects on property values in the
neighborhoods that will potentially have these temporary dwelling units in them. As we grow
as a city, this can have a severe impact on people looking to move here and seeing it as
normal to have temporary dwelling units all over.
See responses above to “1. Will this impact the sales of neighboring properties?”
In addition, this question discounts the issues faced by “people looking to move here” who are
unable to do so because of the housing shortage.
18 Available at https://library.municode.com/wa/port_angeles/codes/code_of_ordinances?
nodeId=TIT8HESA_CH8.30NU_8.30.060PAVEREPR.
Councilmember Schromen-Wawrin 13 of 21
Attachment B: Public Comment
B-83
Utilities
1. Concerned about the safety of the above-ground/temporary connections to power,
sewer, and water, as well as the financial liability to the City for these types of connections.
This provision considers the policy trade-offs between below-ground connections – which tend
to be permanent – and the intent for these dwelling units to be temporary, and thus be quickly put into
use and also quickly decommissioned when the permit expires. The proposed text reads, in pertinent
part:
17.96.074 – Temporary dwelling units during housing shortages.
. . .
(C) Requirements for Temporary Use Permits.
The Director of the Department of Community and Economic Development may authorize a
temporary use permit for a temporary dwelling unit when:
. . .
(2) The permit applicant provides a plan for connecting the proposed temporary dwelling unit with
electricity, water, and side sewer connections, which need not be below-ground connections (e.g.
connections could include proper gauge electric cord from a house outlet, potable water hose from an
outdoor faucet, and a releasable attachment to a side sewer cleanout);
This provision envisions electric and water connections above ground via appropriate electric
cord and potable water hose, and a sewer connection through a flexible hose attached to a side sewer
cleanout. This setup would be similar to RVs parked at state campgrounds that provide water, sewer,
and electric for each RV site.
The Washington State legislature has recognized this trade-off in other areas as well. For
example, in authorizing a separate building code for “temporary worker housing,” the legislature
required state agencies to develop a code that balanced these conflicting interests: “The temporary
worker building code shall permit and facilitate designs and formats that allow for maximum
affordability, consistent with the provision of decent, safe, and sanitary housing.” RCW 70.114B.081(1)
(b).
Thus, the State has recognized in its own laws that the balance between safety and affordability
is contextual, and that the safety standard for permanent buildings does not necessarily apply when
considering temporary dwellings. Most likely, the City’s responsibility here is to maintain reasonable
levels of safety for the dwelling unit’s occupants and for others. If above-ground connections are
inherently dangerous, then they should not be permitted. However, if they are reasonable under the
circumstances of a temporary dwelling unit, then the City would not be negligent. See, e.g., Wuthrich v.
Councilmember Schromen-Wawrin 14 of 21
Attachment B: Public Comment
B-84
King Cnty., 185 Wn.2d 19, 366 P.3d 926 (2016) (“Municipalities are generally held to a reasonableness
standard consistent with that applied to private parties.” (citations omitted)).19
I defer to the Public Works Department for an assessment of the safety risk, and to the Legal
Department for an assessment of liability.
2. There needs to be a closer look at what would happen to city power, water and sewer
rates if we suddenly have an influx of temporary housing units (such as rolling black outs due
to the power grid not being able to support the extra power being drawn, sewage backups in
homes, failed septic systems, etc).
The “implementation review” provision proposal, discussed above under Real Estate question 1
(“Will this impact the sales of neighboring properties?”) would allow for this assessment with several
temporary dwelling units in place.
3. “Selling” power and water is not allowed. For example, the property owner says “my
bill used be X and now it’s Y” and tries to obtain money from the RV dweller for the excess
cost of utilities (this is illegal).
The landlord would probably need to include the utilities in the price of rent for the temporary
dwelling unit. Individuals considering being landlords through the Temporary Dwelling Unit ordinance
should consider the additional electric, water, and sewer utility use in budgeting the amount they charge
for rent.
Questions on Proposed Ordinance Language
1. A twelve month period plus an option to extend exceeds current zoning code’s
definition of “temporary” as described in Section 17.96.075.
PAMC 17.96.075 is an existing ordinance authorizing temporary use permits “for the
construction and occupancy of temporary buildings, including mobile homes, used in conjunction with
construction or reconstruction projects, or other circumstances requiring a temporary installation and
occupancy, for a period not to exceed one year.”20 These temporary use permits are already one
exception to the prohibition on RVs and similar vehicles being used for residential purposes. PAMC
17.96.025.
The Temporary Dwelling Unit ordinance creates an additional exception from the general
prohibition, “intended to provide temporary relief from housing shortages.” Proposed-PAMC
17.96.074(A). This exception operates independently from the requirements under PAMC 17.96.075 to
obtain temporary use permits. Indeed, the proposed ordinance expressly states that “Permit renewals
are not subject to the limitations of section 17.96.0875(B) PAMC.” Id. at (I).
19 Slip Opinion available at https://www.courts.wa.gov/opinions/pdf/915555.pdf.
20 Available at https://library.municode.com/wa/port_angeles/codes/code_of_ordinances?
nodeId=TIT17ZO_CH17.96ADEN_17.96.075TEUSPE.
Councilmember Schromen-Wawrin 15 of 21
Attachment B: Public Comment
B-85
Given this question, it would make sense to remove the subsection reference (“(B)”) noted
above, and just state “Permit renewals are not subject to the limitations of section 17.96.0875
PAMC.”
2. “These temporary dwelling units are already available as a source of housing and
could be available as affordable housing to relieve the affordable housing crisis.” The scope
of this statement seems questionable. Certainly not all RVs are available for temporary
dwelling units. Is there any evidence about how many dwelling units would come onto the
market?
For a temporary dwelling unit to come onto the market under this proposed ordinance, there
would have to be the combination of (1) a willing permit applicant, (2) with property that could
accommodate the siting requirements, and (3) who owns an LNI compliant RV or who is willing to rent
space to a tenant (who would be a co-applicant for the permit) to park the tenant’s own LNI compliant
RV.
I don’t know how much this will actually happen. The “implementation review” provision (see
above) would allow for a brake and evaluation on permitting Temporary Dwelling Units if there is
abundant demand. On the other hand, if the combination described above is not common, we may see
only a few permit applications.
3. “Section 17.96.074 (Temporary dwelling units during housing shortages) or Section
17.956.06075 PAMC (Temporary Use Permit).” I understand that no change is intended to
17.96.075. Is that correct?
Correct.
The proposed ordinance does modify PAMC 17.13.080 and PAMC 17.96.025 by replacing
reference to section “17.95.060” (which no longer exists per ordinance 3577 on Mar. 21, 2017) with
“17.96.075” (the new section number for the provisions that had been under 17.95.060). This is merely
copyediting, and does not change the substance of PAMC 17.96.075 in any way.
4. As a practical matter, it is very difficult to enforce the provision that some residence is
temporary. Once a family moves into some structure, it becomes their home, and it is legally
difficult and politically unpopular to force them out.
The proposed ordinance incorporates the dispute mechanism from landlord-tenant law, which
includes the ability to evict a tenant. Proposed-PAMC 17.96.074(F). The proposed ordinance also
requires the landlord include a copy of the temporary use permit in the rental agreement and not rent
the temporary dwelling unit for a period that extends beyond the expiration date of the temporary use
permit. Id. at (G)(1). Thus, the landlord (aka property owner) has legal mechanisms to end the tenancy.
The question suggests the possibility of the landlord and tenant conspiring to disregard the
expiration of the temporary use permit. Were this the case, adjoining neighbors would know, as the
proposed ordinance requires the temporary use permit be places conspicuously on the exterior of the
Councilmember Schromen-Wawrin 16 of 21
Attachment B: Public Comment
B-86
temporary dwelling unit, and copies be provided to adjoining neighbors. This is where the city would
have a code enforcement issue. However, this hypothetical does not really change the dynamics in the
city, as that situation is already happening throughout Port Angeles, in situations where the City has had
no involvement in ensuring basic life safety measures are met, and where the parties involved have
poorly defined rights and duties.
5. “Recreational vehicles and recreational park trailers” - Clearly define these terms
There is a plethora of names for vehicles that also can serve as temporary dwellings. Port
Angeles’ existing code attempts to name in, e.g, PAMC 17.13.080: “House trailers, automobiles,
automobile trailers, mobile homes, park model manufactured homes, boats, recreation vehicles,
vacation trailers and campers . . . .” Passively acknowledging the definitional difficulties, Labor and
Industries (LNI) just gets really general and refers to “Mobile or Modular Structures.”21 It’s not easy to
define these terms.
The Temporary Dwelling Unit ordinance relies on the definitions for RVs and recreational park
trailers used by LNI. See Proposed-PAMC 17.96.074(C)(1) (“The structure that will be the temporary
dwelling unit bears a valid insignia issued by the Washington State Department of Labor and Industries
per RCW 43.22.350 and Chapter 296-150P [the “P” is for park trailer] or 296-150R WAC [the “R” is
for RV] . . . .” In other words, if LNI puts compliance insignia on a vehicle that recognizes it as an RV,
then it’s an RV. If LNI puts recreational park trailer insignia on it, then it is a recreational park trailer.22
The proposed ordinance does not actually use the terms “recreational vehicle” or “recreational park
trailer” in its substantive text (those words are used only in the recitals and purpose section), thus, they
do not require definitions.
Also, by allowing LNI to define which structures can be temporary dwelling units, there is the
possibility of “tiny homes” complying under the Temporary Dwelling Unit requirements as an “RV” or
“recreational park trailer.” However, the process to get a “tiny home” certified by LNI as either an RV
or recreational park trailer is challenging. (See Appendix A, “Tiny Home handout v3” document
provided by LNI on April 16, 2018)
6. “The temporary dwelling unit is sited fully on the landowner permittee's property and
complies with setbacks, site location, number of vehicles, and other requirements in Section
8.30.060 PAMC (Parking of vehicles on residential property)” Other limitations? For example,
can a family of four take up residence in a VW camper van?
Regarding the specific example, I doubt a VW camper van meets LNI criteria to be an RV, so
that vehicle is probably ineligible to receive a temporary use permit to be a temporary dwelling unit.
Generally, landlords can put reasonable occupancy limits in their rental agreements. Occupancy
limits that are unreasonably low likely violate the federal Fair Housing Act by discriminating against
21 See http://www.lni.wa.gov/TradesLicensing/FAS/OtherMobileStructures/default.asp.
22 See images of these insignia at http://www.lni.wa.gov/TradesLicensing/FAS/RealtorLender/Labels.asp.
Councilmember Schromen-Wawrin 17 of 21
Attachment B: Public Comment
B-87
families with children.23 I did not find a Port Angeles ordinance setting high occupancy limits (aka
overcrowding or over occupancy).24
Thus, landlords can set reasonable limits on the number of occupants in a temporary dwelling
unit, but are not required to set a maximum occupancy limit. A provision could be added to the draft
ordinance if this is a concern.
7. “The permittee shall also provide adjoining neighbors with a copy of the temporary use
Permit.” Who is this referring to? Can neighbors object to the use? They would have a right to
object prior to issuance of most other permits.
Merriam-Webster Dictionary defines “adjoining” as “touching or bounding at a point or line.”
The applicable definition of “neighbor” from Merriam-Webster is “one living or located near another.”
Thus, “adjoining neighbors” means the people who reside in properties that touch the permittee’s
property. This is a notice provision.
Port Angeles Municipal Code already has a temporary use permit section for RVs as temporary
dwellings. PAMC 17.96.075. If there is a right to object to permits issued under that ordinance, then the
proposed ordinance should also be treated similarly.
23 The federal Fair Housing Act prohibits discrimination in housing based on familial status (the presence of children in
the family), which affects occupancy policies that would discriminate against families with children. The Department of
Housing and Urban Development (HUD) has interpreted this to mean “that an occupancy policy of two persons in a
bedroom, as a general rule, is reasonable under the Fair Housing Act.” 63 Fed. Reg. 70256, available at
https://www.hud.gov/sites/documents/DOC_35681.PDF. HUD notes, however, that this general rule is rebuttable and
does not create a national occupancy code. Id. at 70257 (includes hypothetical examples).
24 Compare with, e.g., City of Tacoma Municipal Code § 2.01.060(V) (“Overcrowding, Residential Buildings. For single-
family dwellings, duplexes, and multi-family dwellings with three or more units, the maximum number of residents of
each dwelling unit shall not exceed the gross area divided by 200, rounded to the nearest whole number. Bedrooms will
accommodate two persons with a minimum size of 70 square feet, with no dimension being less than seven feet. An
additional 50 square feet shall be provided for each person in excess of two. Children less than one year of age shall not
be considered in applying the above provisions.”); City of Seattle Municipal Code § 22.206.020, available at
https://library.municode.com/wa/seattle/codes/municipal_code?
nodeId=TIT22BUCOCO_SUBTITLE_IIHOCO_CH22.206HABU_SUBCHAPTER_IMISPOCST_22.206.020FLAR.
Councilmember Schromen-Wawrin 18 of 21
Attachment B: Public Comment
B-88
Three Year Plan Concerns
1. Three-year sunset doesn't feel like a long enough period to allow for low income
housing to become available and once set up how do we take away in three years? (Liability
and increased homelessness in 3 years).
I originally envisioned the temporary dwelling unit ordinance being in effect during housing
shortages, and expiring once the rental vacancy rate normalized.25 The uncertainty in this provision
appeared to be a challenge, so we changed it to sunset in three years following review.
Termination of tenancy is addressed above under section “Questions on Proposed Ordinance
Language” number 4.
I defer to the Legal Department for the City’s liability analysis.
2. Once the three year period is up, what then? We go and send out eviction notices or
do we have a plan in place to have better housing options? It seems it would make sense that
we would limit the number of permits and be active in finding permanent housing for these
individuals and keep this a revolving cycle until we are in a position to increase rentals as a
whole for the community.
Yes, permanent housing is the goal. At this time, there is not enough permanent housing. So
people are making do with what they have: living in cars and other vehicles, often illegally parked.
While we work on resolving the housing shortage, where should people live?
Permits
1. Does the city then handle/issue a certificate of occupancy?
Use the procedure for the existing temporary use permit provision for RVs as dwelling units,
PAMC 17.96.075.
25 Permits would only issue during housing shortages, defined as “(B) Rental vacancy rate. For purposes of this section, a
housing shortage exists whenever the rental vacancy rate is less than six percent, as most recently reported by the
United States Department of Commerce, Census Bureau, American Communities Survey 1-year estimate for Clallam
County. This rental vacancy rate is available from factfinder.census.gov, by clicking “advanced search” and then
selecting topic: “selected housing” (be sure to subsequently select the most recent “ACS 1-year estimates” and not
“ACS 5-year estimates”) and selecting location: “Clallam County.” (This section does not reference the Port Angeles
census location because it is not a statistically large enough area to provide 1-year estimates.)”
Councilmember Schromen-Wawrin 19 of 21
Attachment B: Public Comment
B-89
2. Concerned there will be an issue with the amount of permits that the City will issue.
Perhaps it is beneficial to have a maximum that the City would give out to help prevent this
from turning into a situation that allows people who may not be in need of temporary housing
to capitalize on cheaper rent for three years. We need a way to determine the needs of
people that are applying for these permits so we can give access to people who truly need
temporary housing.
The “implementation review” provision described above in “Real Estate & Property” question 1
(“Will this impact the sales of neighboring properties?”) would provide for an a pause after ten permits
to evaluate the policy.
In terms of the concern that people may “capitalize on cheaper rent for three years,” we need to
remember that 38.6% of the rented households in Clallam County are paying 35% or more of their
household income on rent.26 This is nearly 40% of the families in Clallam County who don’t have
affordable housing. I’m not sure how to emphasize that we need more affordable housing now, and we
don’t need to be deciding who is needy enough.
3. What department and what does staffing look like for handling this permitting process?
Permits are issued by the Department of Community and Economic Development. Proposed-
PAMC 17.96.074(C), (D).
Code Enforcement
1. This proposed ordinance appears to need an analysis of projected code compliance
and enforcement needed to ensure success. We know that we lack sufficient code
compliance resources right now. Should an analysis of this proposed ordinance show that it
will be in large success (i.e. have voluntary compliance) without a need for additional
enforcement resources that would be helpful to know. Given the large number of
unaddressed code enforcement needs and the reality of having to delay or prioritize some
code important due to limited resources, adding additional workload should be carefully
considered. This proposed ordinance if adopted would have a higher chance of success if it
there is an apparent certainty of consistent enforcement. Our current challenges with junk
vehicle abatement and storage of trailers and RVs on City streets given our limited code
enforcement resources might be instructive.
Yes, many people currently cannot afford to properly maintain, store, or dispose of vehicles.
Many people cannot afford permanent housing and are living in vehicles, frequently in violation of city
code. This “code enforcement first” argument seems to presume that people who are living in RVs have
somewhere else to go. Many people do not currently have a legal way out of their illegal living
situation, because they cannot afford rent.
26 Data from factfinder.census.gov, DP04 2016 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates for Clallam County. Total
“Occupied units paying rent (excluding units where [gross rent as a percentage of household income] cannot be
computed)” is 8,459, and number of units paying “35.0 percent or more” is 3,269.
Councilmember Schromen-Wawrin 20 of 21
Attachment B: Public Comment
B-90
If people don’t follow this ordinance by applying for temporary use permits for RV dwellings,
the result will be exactly what is happening now in the city: illegal RV dwellings. It won’t change the
ongoing code violations. People are breaking the law now because they cannot afford to do otherwise,
and don’t have any other options. This proposed ordinance creates a legal option.
2. “This ordinance creates an additional exemption, provided through temporary use
permits, from an existing prohibition on RVs and park trailers as dwellings. This ordinance
would likely increase the number of temporary use permits issued by the City, which would
involve staff time. However, it may also decrease the number of RVs and park trailers that do
not conform to nuisance parking codes, or illegally camp on city streets, which may decrease
staff time involved in code enforcement.” The reality is that currently there is no dedicated
staff resources to code enforcement (there is no Code Compliance Officer on staff). There will
be no savings of staff time with the anticipated increase of temporary use permit application
review and processing. This will be added on top of an existing situation where Staff is unable
to fairly and adequately enforce the public nuisance complaint forms currently being received.
Council is discussing code compliance with staff at a worksession on September 25, 2018. Also
I hope to see a proposed budget to address these issues.
3. and 4. Over this past year, numerous public nuisance complaint forms have been
received with specific concerns of abandoned or run-down RV structures on property. Below
are a list of items that Staff has continually responded to in a Code Enforcement capacity
related to RV structures: a. Electrical hazards related to using extension cords for power or
over loading in colder weather. b. Maintaining Sewage connections or the lack of. c. Fire
hazards, including but not limited to, LPG fuel leaks and separation distance to structures. d.
Trash, storage, debris, parking and general maintenance of the property. e. Drug use and
activity in relation to attractive nuisance. f. If this proposed Ordinance is temporary in nature,
what will the end result look like related to enforcement of those who continue to use their
property? g. Degradation of neighborhoods and property values. h. Enforcement of permits
for Electrical, Plumbing, etc.
The proposed ordinance would provide City review of electrical cord selection, sewage
connection, separation distance to structures, and garbage access. Neighborhood effects from an illegal
RV dwelling is not synonymous with the effects of a legal RV dwelling. Drug use is addressed in
Landlord-Tenant law and is often grounds for eviction.
Councilmember Schromen-Wawrin 21 of 21
Attachment B: Public Comment
B-91
August 22, 2017
What you need to know about “Tiny Homes”
L&I frequently receives inquiries regarding the rules and requirements for “tiny homes”.
There is no official definition of “tiny home”. All “tiny homes” in Washington must meet either the State
Building Code requirements (RCW 19.27.031), Park Model RV (PMRV) requirements, the Recreational
Vehicle (RV) requirements (RCW 43.22.340) or the HUD Manufactured Home Construction and Safety
Standard (CFR 3280) depending on how it will be used and constructed.
Please note that while L&I inspects and labels several of these types of structures, or units, cities and
counties are responsible for regulating how all structures, or units, including, RV’s, PMRV’s modular
buildings and manufactured homes can be used within their jurisdictions. If you have questions about
using an RV, PMRV, modular building or manufactured home as a “tiny home”, please contact your local
building department first. L&I can only approve the construction of RV’s, PMRV’s and modular
buildings, not how they are used or where they can be located.
Step by step – Getting your tiny home approved by L&I.
Step 1). Determine if your structure, or unit, can be approved by L&I.
• Your structure cannot be approved by L&I if:
o The home will be used to live in as a dwelling unit* and –
o The home is being built on the site where it will be used or
o The home is a HUD approved manufactured home or
o The home is converted from something else such as a shipping container, shed or other
open framed building (like those found home improvement stores, or ordered online), and
the conversion is taking place on the site where it will be used.
* DWELLING UNIT. A single unit providing complete, independent living facilities for one or more
persons, including permanent provisions for living, sleeping, eating, cooking and sanitation.
Site built, or converted tiny homes are regulated by the local cities and counties, please contact your
local building department with questions about permitting and inspections.
• Your structure can be approved by L&I as a modular building if:
o The home will be used to live in as a dwelling unit* (this is the only type of structure
approved by L&I to be used as a dwelling unit*) and –
o The home is being constructed somewhere other than where it will be used and
Attachment B: Public Comment
B-92
o The home is built to the State Building Code requirements. NOTE: The building can be any
size allowable by the code(s).
* DWELLING UNIT. A single unit providing complete, independent living facilities for one or more
persons, including permanent provisions for living, sleeping, eating, cooking and sanitation.
• Your unit can be approved by L&I as a Park Model RV (PMRV) if:
o The home is primarily designed to provide temporary living quarters for recreational,
camping or seasonal use and -
o The home is built on a single chassis, mounted on wheels so that it can be moved around.
PMRV’s may be wider than 8’-6” (but must be transportable on the road, contact the
Washington State Patrol and Department of Transportation for more information) and
o the unit does not exceed 400 square feet when set up. If square footage will exceed 400
square feet see the modular building requirements. NOTE: this is not a complete definition.
See WAC 296-150P for complete details.
• Your unit can be approved by L&I as a Recreational Vehicle (RV) if:
o The home is designed primarily for recreational camping or travel use and -
o The home no wider than 8’-6” in travel mode and is a vehicular type unit, or built on a
vehicle chassis, so that it can be moved around and
o does not exceed 400 square feet in area when set up. NOTE: this is not a complete
definition. See WAC 296-150R for complete details.
Step 2). Submit plans showing how you will build your Modular “tiny home”, RV or Park Model RV. We
will review your plans to the codes, or standards, that apply. Please see the following fact sheets RV’s
(link), PMRV’s (link), modular homes (link) for additional information.
Step 3). Have your structure, or unit, inspected. Once your plans are approved we will provide you
instructions on how to schedule inspections. We will charge you for the time and mileage to do the
inspection, normally around $200 each trip (within the state). Two to three trips are typically required.
Modular “home” fact sheet.
Modular homes are structures, which are used as dwellings and are built somewhere other than where
they will be used or installed. They can be mounted on chassis or moved by means of a separate trailer.
Modular homes can be installed permanently or moved from place to place but the installation and use
always requires permits from the local city our county building department. All modular buildings must
meet the requirements of the Washington State Building Code and must be inspected and approved by
Attachment B: Public Comment
B-93
Labor & Industries. Any foundation system for a modular home, including types such as a chassis, post &
pier, footing & stem wall, etc. must be permitted, reviewed and approved by the local building
department. Modular homes can be of any size and shape within the broad limits of the building code.
To have your modular home approved by L&I, first prepare construction plans for your home showing
that it will meet the requirements of the Washington State Building code. You can find out more about
the codes that apply to your project at the Washington State Building Code website
https://fortress.wa.gov/ga/apps/sbcc/Default.aspx. If you are unfamiliar with building code
requirements or with construction techniques, you should employ a design professional such as a
Professional Engineer or Architect to help you.
The plans must include floor plans, elevations, cross sections, structural details, truss drawings
foundation/anchoring plans, plumbing, mechanical and electrical drawing. A packet of information with
more detailed information on modular buildings can be found on the L&I website
http://www.lni.wa.gov/TradesLicensing/FAS/OtherMobileStructures/default.asp
The structural portions of the plans must be stamped by a Washington State registered Professional
Engineer or Architect and include a basic structural analysis showing the building meets the minimum
structural design requirements of the building code. Other non-structural drawings such as electrical
and plumbing drawings are not required to be stamped except when they have been prepared by a
licensed architect or engineer.
Modular homes must also meet the requirements of the Washington State Energy Code. Information on
the energy code be found at the Energy WSU website
http://www.energy.wsu.edu/BuildingEfficiency/EnergyCode.aspx. The web site also has the compliance
forms that need to be filled out and submitted with your plans.
When your plans are ready, mail us three complete sets of plans, calculations and supporting
documents. Include a completed “plan application” (form F623-006-000) from our web site
http://www.lni.wa.gov/FormPub/results.asp?Section=4&SubSection=102 and the plan review fee.
Please contact us at FAS1@lni.wa.gov for help figuring the plan review fee; for a small home under 400
square feet it will be around $450. Our mailing address is on the application form. You should also
include a completed Insignia request (form F623-014-000) and NLEA (form F623-013-000). The
insignia/NLEA fee for a home built in one piece is $310.40. All fees can be on the same check.
New modular plans are put in line for review and normally there is a backlog of several weeks before we
start reviewing them. If the plans examiner has questions or needs additional information, we will
contact you directly. Once we have reviewed and approved your plans, you will be able to have us
inspect your modular home. Depending on the complexity of your home there will be two or more
inspections while you are building it. Inspections are about $200 each (in state) depending on how far
the inspector has to travel. The inspector will verify that the modular home meets the requirements of
the Washington State Building Code and once your home has passed inspection, he will put the
Washington State Modular insignia (gold seal) on the unit.
Attachment B: Public Comment
B-94
The work on all electrical and plumbing systems must be performed by Washington State licensed
electricians and plumbers with some exceptions for owners working on their own property as allowed
by RCW 19.28 and RCW 18.106.
RV fact sheet for units built by an individual or small manufacturer.
Recreational Vehicles (RV’s) are trailers or motorized vehicles used for recreational camping or travel
and must meet the requirements found in the NFPA 1192 Standard on Recreational Vehicles. RV’s must
be a licensed legal vehicle so they cannot be over 8’-6” wide or 14’ in height when in travel mode and
they cannot exceed 400 square feet in set up mode (fifth wheel units are limited to 430 square feet).
While most RV’s are built by specialized factories, individuals can also build an RV. Whether you are
building an RV for your personal use or you are a small business located in Washington State that is
building RV’s for in-state consumers, you will need to have your RV inspected and approved by L&I. RV’s
being built for sale or lease in Washington must pass L&I inspections and have a Washington State RV
label. If you are building an RV for your personal use you should have it inspected and labelled by L&I so
that it can be licensed and insured. Sometimes people use existing vehicles in alternate ways. L&I is
only involved with vehicle conversions if systems such as 110/120V electrical, propane gas, or plumbing
systems are added.
To have your RV approved by L&I, first obtain a copy of the NFPA 1192 standard and the UPA-1 plan
guide from NFPA.org or the RVIA.org bookstore. Next, prepare construction plans for your RV using the
UPA-1 as a guide. The plan set should include the drawings listed in the UPA-1 and show all relevant
information as outlined in the guide. You can omit any information that is not applicable to your design.
Your plans do not need to be stamped by an engineer or architect.
When your plans are ready, mail us two copies along with a completed “plan application” (form F622-
006-000) from our web site http://www.lni.wa.gov/FormPub/results.asp?Section=4&SubSection=99 and
the plan review fee of $93.90. Our mailing address is on the application form. You should also include a
completed RV Insignia order (form F622-021-000) and the $25 insignia fee. Both fees can be on the
same check.
New RV plans are put in line for review and normally there is a backlog of several weeks before we start
reviewing them. If the plans examiner has questions or needs additional information, we will contact
you directly. Once we have reviewed and approved your plans, you will be able to have us inspect your
RV. Depending on the complexity of your RV there will be one or more inspections while you are
building it. Inspections are about $200 each (in state) depending on how far the inspector has to travel.
The inspector will verify that the RV meets the requirements of the NFPA 1192 standard and once your
RV has passed inspection, he will put the Washington State RV insignia on the unit.
You are not required to use licensed electricians and plumber for wiring and plumbing systems in RV’s,
however the plumbing, gas and electrical systems must still be designed, and installed, to code. If you
Attachment B: Public Comment
B-95
are not familiar with plumbing and electrical systems, you need to employ licensed professional
electricians and plumbers to help you and who will make sure the work is installed to code. L&I cannot
advise you on, or help you learn, how to do this work.
PMRV fact sheet for units built by an individual or small manufacturer.
Park Model Recreational Vehicles (PMRV’s) are trailers that provide temporary living quarters for
recreational, camping or seasonal use and must meet the requirements found in the ANSI A119.5 Park
Model Recreational Vehicle Standard. PMRV’s must be built on a single permanent chassis, mounted on
wheels, and be transportable down the highway. If they exceed 8’-6” in width or 14’ in height when in
travel mode they will need special transportation permits and may be limited on where and how they
can be moved over the road. PMRV’s cannot exceed 400 square feet in overall floor area, including
projections in set up mode.
While most PMRV’s are built by specialized factories, individuals can also build a Park Model RV.
Whether you are building a PMRV for your personal use or you are a small business located in
Washington State that is building Park Models for in-state consumers, you will need to have your PMRV
inspected and approved by L&I. Park Model RV’s being built for sale or lease in Washington must pass
L&I inspections and have a Washington State PMRV label. If you are building a Park Model RV for your
personal use you should have it inspected and labelled by L&I so that it can be licensed and insured.
To have your Park Model RV approved by L&I, first obtain a copy of the ANSI A119.5 standard and the
UPA-1 plan guide from the RVIA.org bookstore. Next, prepare construction plans for your PMRV using
the UPA-1 as a guide. The plan set should include the drawings listed in the UPA-1 and show all relevant
information as outlined in the guide. In addition, if your PMRV is over 8’-6” wide you need to provide
structural drawings, such as cross sections, framing details, truss drawings and elevations showing that
the roof, walls, floor and chassis meet the construction requirements of chapter 5 in the ANSI standard.
Other structural designs can be approved, when stamped by a Washington State registered Professional
Engineer or Architect.
When your plans are ready, mail us two copies along with a completed “plan application” (form F622-
006-000) from our web site http://www.lni.wa.gov/FormPub/results.asp?Section=4&SubSection=99 and
the plan review fee ($129.90 if over 8’-6” wide otherwise $98.20). Our mailing address is on the
application form. You should also include a completed RV/PMRV Insignia order (form F622-021-000)
and the $25 insignia fee. Both fees can be on the same check.
New PMRV plans are put in line for review and usually there is a backlog of several weeks before we
start the review. If the plans examiner has questions or needs additional information, we will contact
you directly. Once we have reviewed and approved your plans, you will be able to have us inspect your
PMRV. Depending on the complexity of your PMRV there will be two or more inspections while you are
building it. Inspections are about $200 each (in state) depending on how far the inspector has to travel.
The inspector will verify that the PMRV meets the requirements of the ANSI A119.5 standard and once
your PMRV has passed inspection, he will put the Washington State Park Model RV insignia on the unit.
Attachment B: Public Comment
B-96
You are not required to use licensed electricians and plumber for wiring and plumbing systems in
PMRV’s, however the plumbing, gas and electrical systems must still be designed and installed to code.
If you are not familiar with plumbing and electrical systems, you need to employ licensed professional
electricians and plumbers to help you and who will make sure the work is installed to code. L&I cannot
advise you on or help you learn how to do this work.
Attachment B: Public Comment
B-97
1
Kevin Bagwell
From:Allyson Brekke
Sent:Monday, August 20, 2018 2:13 PM
To:Kevin Bagwell
Subject:FW: Affordable housing
‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐
From: shylawilcox@gmail.com [mailto:shylawilcox@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, August 20, 2018 1:58 PM
To: Allyson Brekke <Abrekke@cityofpa.us>
Subject: Affordable housing
Please consider favorably the short term housing proposal.
Sincerely,
Shyla Wilcox
Sent from my iPad
Attachment B: Public Comment
B-98
1
Kevin Bagwell
From:Allyson Brekke
Sent:Monday, August 20, 2018 4:36 PM
To:Kevin Bagwell
Subject:FW:
From: susanhillgren [mailto:susanhillgren@olypen.com]
Sent: Monday, August 20, 2018 4:10 PM
To: Allyson Brekke <Abrekke@cityofpa.us>
Subject:
Please consider the option thatLindsey brings to the table concerning helping homeless no one has
brought forth any viable solutions at this time. The city currently has many people living in rv"s now.
They are just not reported. Tafy just fed a homeless 73 year old man, cancer survivor, who lives in his car with 2 dogs. Recently divorced and lost everything he was a principal at Clallam bay and an
educator. Let's find a safe and legal option for this growing population before they too find a sheet
and a door and end their lives also. Make a difference today!
Sent from my Sprint Samsung Galaxy Note8.
Attachment B: Public Comment
B-99
1
Allyson Brekke
From:Kari Martinez-Bailey
Sent:Wednesday, August 22, 2018 8:15 AM
To:Allyson Brekke
Cc:Nathan West
Subject:FW: Temporary Dwelling Unit Use Ordinance - support
fyi
From: J P [mailto:jfboyer01@hotmail.com]
Sent: Saturday, August 18, 2018 1:45 PM
To: City Council <council@cityofpa.us>; Dan McKeen <Dmckeen@cityofpa.us>
Subject: Temporary Dwelling Unit Use Ordinance ‐ support
Hello,
I support the temporary unit dwelling ordinance to allow the temporary rental of RVs on private property.
Thank you Jill Peterse
Attachment B: Public Comment
B-100
1
Allyson Brekke
From:Kari Martinez-Bailey
Sent:Wednesday, August 22, 2018 8:16 AM
To:Allyson Brekke
Cc:Nathan West
Subject:FW: Temporary Dwelling Unit ordinance input
fyi
From: Judith Broadhurst [mailto:jaebroadhurst@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, August 20, 2018 1:00 PM
To: City Council <council@cityofpa.us>; Dan McKeen <Dmckeen@cityofpa.us>
Subject: Temporary Dwelling Unit ordinance input
What kind of city do we want this to be? Whom do we want to attract to it, both businesses and individuals?
What is the trend in age and composition of our population? What's the profile of the people this would benefit
most? Are those things consistent?
This sounds terribly unsafe to me, too. Fires and sewage spills seem inevitable. Do we have an enforcement
officer? A compliance monitoring officer? Someone to handle disputes when the tenant refuses to move the RV
at the end of a lease or becomes a squatter?
What about those who will come here from elsewhere in their RVs?
What about when the new housing on Lauridsen is available. Will there still be a "rental crisis" then?
The sites or documents that Lindsey linked to do not actually support his argument for this extreme plan. Three examples:
1.He says: Years of economic and social research that have found, as one advocacy group summarized, “that
supportive and affordable housing did not lower property values, reduce safety or hurt the community in any
way.” [Source: http://www.yesinmybackyard.ca/research-and-policy/]
However, all comments on the page he linked to are based on "supportive housing," which this site https://bit.ly/2MkKbox defines as "Supportive housing is affordable housing with on-site services that help
formerly homeless, disabled tenants live in dignity in the community."
2.Lindsey also says: While this research shows that a policy like the Temporary Dwelling Unit ordinance isn’t
going to decrease property values, I understand people’s concern here and take it seriously. So one option I
suggested as an amendment to the proposed ordinance is a “implementation review” provision, which would
temporarily suspend acceptance of new temporary use permits after an initial threshold of permit applications,
in order for the City to evaluate the policy with some facts on the ground. Ferndale did something similar when
it implemented its Accessory Dwelling Unit ordinance [Source: Ferndale Municipal Code section, part of ADU
regs: https://www.codepublishing.com/WA/Ferndale/...].
That's about ADUs -- accessory dwelling units, which are permanent structures or sometimes "tiny houses" in
a few cities, also known as "granny units." Houses, not RVs.
Attachment B: Public Comment
B-101
2
3. Another source that Lindsey linked to in his email is worth reading. I realize that his intention with the RV ordinance is not JUST to help homeless people, just as what this guidance says is not relevant ONLY to them:
"Although often proposed as 'temporary' approaches, these programs prove difficult to close once they open.
While a community may intend for these settings to be a temporary part of its response to homelessness, they can prove difficult to close, especially if there are not adequate plans and resources dedicated to helping people exit these settings and end their homelessness."
"Ultimately, access to stable housing that people can afford—
with the right level of services to help them succeed—is what ends homelessness."
From this report:
Caution is Needed When Considering “Sanctioned Encampments” or “Safe Zones”
https://www.usich.gov/resources/uploads/asset_library/Caution_Sanctioned_Encampments_Safe_Zones_052318.pdf
PERSONAL CONCERNS
I lived in a trailer park, as a tenant, before moving here. I invested what savings I had for retirement in the 832 sf 2-BR house I bought in PA with a low-income, first-time home buyers' mortgage handled by Umpqua Bank. I do not want to live in a trailer park again and lose whatever I've gained by that investment. It would break my
heart if this is what happens to this town and to my home.
I am in favor of "affordable" housing. I was driven out of my home of more than 20 years, just as I was planning to retire, because of the greed that made where I lived unaffordable for any but those with high incomes. Even so, a lot of people here are unrealistic in their expectations and demands. Everyone I know had
to go to bigger cities to get experience and to get an education or at least go where they could learn skills to
make them employable. I don't get why so many here expect "family wage" (e.g. union scale) jobs with no
education, no skills, no willingness to learn new skills. I don't get why we have two Walmarts within 16 miles and let them avoid full-time pay and benefits. You want companies to move businesses here or people to move
here and start businesses? This would be totally contrary to attracting them. It sounds one step up from
becoming like Slab City.
VACATION LODGING CONCERNS
About the argument that "vacation lodging" is taking up what could be rental housing for local residents:
To make ends meet and do necessary work on this little house, I've hosted Airbnb guests for two years. I utterly
hate doing it and gave up my own bedroom to do it. All other Airbnb hosts I know personally live in the homes where they rent space to travelers. We pay local and hospitality taxes and give visitors a far better impression of
PA than they'd get merely driving into town en route to Hurricane Ridge and a far better experience here,
because we act as concierges and travel guides, too. They send more people here to contribute to our economy
as a result.
However, there is a trend toward people buying homes and condos and hiring people to handle them as Airbnb
or VRBO rentals as "investment property." If there weren't a need and a market, they would have no reason to
do that.
DO THIS INSTEAD, please
Attachment B: Public Comment
B-102
3
Finally, I'm glad to see that the council has been looking at what other cities have done, yet all the talk continues to be about "family housing" and "houses." Younger people and older people here need condos and
apartments. Make deals for those vacant eyesore buildings all over town to turn them into studio (same as
"efficiency"), 1 BR, maybe 2 BR, even "micro" apts. For some, especially for older people, use a cohousing
model, but don't make it so expensive that only rich people can afford to buy into it. It works for rentals and low-income housing, too. Include spaces for people to gather and share meals, to garden, to walk their small or smallish dogs. That's my idea of "supportive housing."
Judith Broadhurst Port Angeles, WA Nothing changes if nothing changes
Attachment B: Public Comment
B-103
1
Kevin Bagwell
From:Allyson Brekke
Sent:Tuesday, August 21, 2018 10:50 AM
To:Kevin Bagwell
Subject:FW: Temporary Dwelling Unit ordinance
‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐
From: Steve and Paula Obrebski [mailto:psobreb@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, August 20, 2018 9:49 PM
To: Allyson Brekke <Abrekke@cityofpa.us>
Cc: Lindsey Schromen‐Wawrin <LSwawrin@cityofpa.us>
Subject: Temporary Dwelling Unit ordinance
August 20, 2018
1009 South Laurel Street
Port Angeles, WA 98362
360‐457‐3551
psobreb@gmail.com
Allyson Brekke
Acting Director of Community and Economic Development City of Port Angeles Port Angeles, WA
Dear Ms. Brekke:
Please pass on to the Port Angeles Planning Commission my support for the proposed Temporary Dwelling Unit
ordinance, which would allow property owners to use RVs as rentals, under the restrictions laid forth in the proposed
ordinance.
Port Angeles has an acute shortage of affordable housing. Long‐term solutions are exactly that – very long term in
achieving. In the meantime the proposal under consideration makes use of existing resources to ameliorate the housing
situation in the near‐term.
This proposed ordinance can have an immediate impact. It proposes utilizing physical infrastructure already in place and
existing structures. It can be implemented within the current legal framework since it takes advantage of legal
protections already spelled out for landlords and tenants. It protects interests of landlords, tenants, neighbors, and the
public health of the community.
This well‐considered proposal is a very moderate first step towards addressing the city's housing shortage in general and
lack of affordable housing in particular. If such a reasonable proposal cannot be approved, I despair of the City's ever
effectively addressing the lack of local affordable housing.
I acknowledge that the City faces a formidable task given the income disparities in our society today. I was fortunate to
have grown up during a time of increasing prosperity and equality. Perhaps this influences my expectation of what a
community should resemble. The neighborhood where I grew up looked very much like where I live now – small single‐
family homes constructed in the 1920's and 30's. At the time of the World War II housing shortage homeowners added
smaller units to their property, usually an apartment over the garage. After the war these apartments were occupied by
young couples starting families, many going to school on the GI Bill, or by single working men and women. There were
some rooming houses and single‐room‐occupancy hotels mixed in, as well as what we considered fine homes on the
Attachment B: Public Comment
B-104
2
main street. The neighborhood was our country in a microcosm. I remember it fondly. Port Angeles appealed to me as a
place to live precisely because its neighborhoods are a mixture of styles and of small and larger homes.
The proposed ordinance appeals to me because it is not only a first step but presages what a long‐term solution might
look like: mixed neighborhoods of single‐family homes and smaller housing units.
Good luck to you!
Sincerely yours,
Paula Obrebski
cc: Lindsey Schromen‐Wawrin
Attachment B: Public Comment
B-105
1
Kevin Bagwell
From:Allyson Brekke
Sent:Monday, August 20, 2018 5:41 PM
To:Kevin Bagwell
Subject:FW: Comments: Using RVs as temporary shelter
From: RV Consumer Group [mailto:rvgroup@rv.org]
Sent: Monday, August 20, 2018 5:35 PM
To: Allyson Brekke <Abrekke@cityofpa.us>
Cc: Lindsey Schromen‐Wawrin <Lindsey@LindseySchromenWawrin.com>; John Brewer <jcbrewer8@gmail.com>
Subject: Comments: Using RVs as temporary shelter
August 20, 2018
City of Port Angeles / City Council Members
Dear Ms. Brekke and members of the Port Angeles City Council, we represent a nonprofit organization
dedicated to rating recreational vehicles (RVs) for highway control/safety, reliability, and value - much like
Consumer Reports rates autos, trucks. We have been in business in Quilcene, WA for over 25 years and have a
large presence on the internet.
Our main objective has always been to advocate safety in RVs. Most RV manufacturers focus on the glittering
facade of an RV as a sales technique. While we warn RV consumers to be cautious of vehicles (particularly
motorhomes) with a short wheelbase - because of unstableness while on the road - if a vehicle is used mostly to
live in and not be driven around, then the short wheelbase is not as much of an issue.
RVs are sold each year to primarily retired folks seeking an alternative lifestyle after many years of working,
raising families, etc. They now seek to travel and enjoy their retirement years. Younger families are also
seeking adventures not far from home, but want something more substantial to stay in than a tent. Accidents
most definitely occur, whether on the road or parked. However, these accidents, particularly when parked at one location, are not anymore in quantity than a standard home or apartment.
Attachment B: Public Comment
B-106
2
Having said that, it is important to recognize that not all RVs are designed for living full-time. Some simply do
not have the quality or features required for full-timers. Travel trailers and fifth wheels are normally considered
better for year-round living than motorhomes. If the RV owner has properly maintained the RV's heating,
electrical, and water/sewer systems, there should not be an issue for short-term living, such as the one-year permitting process being proposed - as long as the RV meets the criteria for weather and structural integrity (in other words, it is not falling apart or leaking).
There are prejudices, no doubt, about folks living full-time in RVs. Much like there are prejudices about folks
living in tiny homes. However, this must not be a reason for the City of Port Angeles to deny such living arrangements, particularly if the City enforces its codes and the regulations imposed by the Department of Labor and Industries.
Having a shelter, a place to call your own is not a privilege - it is a necessity for a person to feel dignity, to be
able to have a safe place to rest, eat, and bathe. In other words, to feel like a human being and, in most cases, return to being an active member of society.
It is our hope that you consider allowing RVs to be part of the community and give a chance to those who have
been unfortunate, for whatever reason, to lose their home. Living in an RV can be a true blessing when there is
nothing else.
If you require further information, please feel free to contact us via email.
Respectfully,
Connie Gallant
President, RV Consumer Group
https://rv.org
Attachment B: Public Comment
B-107
1
Kevin Bagwell
From:Allyson Brekke
Sent:Monday, August 20, 2018 5:17 PM
To:Kevin Bagwell
Subject:FW: temporary housing
From: Shirley Henderson [mailto:sunnywyo@yahoo.com]
Sent: Monday, August 20, 2018 5:06 PM
To: Allyson Brekke <Abrekke@cityofpa.us>
Subject: temporary housing
I wish to object to temporary housing. I is a bad idea and the homeless can get a job
and work just like everyone else; Shirley Henderson RodgeView drive Port Angeles
Attachment B: Public Comment
B-108
1
Kevin Bagwell
From:Allyson Brekke
Sent:Monday, August 20, 2018 5:39 PM
To:Kevin Bagwell
Subject:FW: Please do not allow RV's to be permitted as temporary dwellings
From: Traci Jernigan [mailto:allviewmotel@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, August 20, 2018 5:24 PM
To: Allyson Brekke <Abrekke@cityofpa.us>
Subject: Please do not allow RV's to be permitted as temporary dwellings
I understand we have a housing shortage right now, we are very near to the new places at the
housing authority opening up which will service the people who would likely be in this living
situation. To allow this would open a huge can of worms and we are not equipped to monitor or enforce policy.
Please DO NOT do this.
Traci Jernigan
All View Motel
P: 360-457-7779
www.allview@olypen.com
Attachment B: Public Comment
B-109
1
Kevin Bagwell
From:Allyson Brekke
Sent:Tuesday, August 21, 2018 10:51 AM
To:Kevin Bagwell
Subject:FW: Use of RVs as temporary dwellings
From: Anne Murray [mailto:murray@olympus.net]
Sent: Tuesday, August 21, 2018 7:39 AM
To: Allyson Brekke <Abrekke@cityofpa.us>
Subject: Use of RVs as temporary dwellings
I wholeheartedly support this carefully reasoned and structured ordinance allowing RVs to be rented
for temporary dwelling places. Anything we can do to help people from becoming homeless is
valuable.
--
Anne Hastings Murray
306 Lopez Ave. Port Angeles, WA 98362-6530
360: 452-5425
Attachment B: Public Comment
B-110
1
Kevin Bagwell
From:Allyson Brekke
Sent:Tuesday, August 21, 2018 10:57 AM
To:Kevin Bagwell
Subject:FW: Temporary Dwelling Unit Ordinance
From: Joanne Eagan [mailto:joanne3cats@msn.com]
Sent: Tuesday, August 21, 2018 8:52 AM
To: Allyson Brekke <Abrekke@cityofpa.us>
Subject: Temporary Dwelling Unit Ordinance
Dear Allyson Brekke, Planning Manager
I am opposed to the ordinance to allow recreational vehicles and recreational park trailers (RVs) to be used as
temporary residences on private property within the City of Port Angeles.
If this proposal is approved it will have a detrimental effect on homeowners, resulting in property devaluation
and making it more difficult to sell one's home. Inhabited RVs in residential neighborhoods throughout the
City will not be a drawing card when Port Angeles is trying to encourage top physicians and teachers and
administrators to move to this area.
From what I have heard and read, there has been a continuous problem with Port Angeles having the ability to
enforce city codes due to staffing shortages. Along with the illegally lived‐in RVs currently on some lots, there
are other ongoing nuisance problems, such as junk vehicles abandoned on streets/parked in front yards and
unkempt property that is littered with debris. Port Angeles does not have the code enforcement staff to
monitor and correct the issues that currently exist. Allowing people to legally reside in RVs in residential areas
will only create more neighborhood nuisances and safety issues. Although the ordinance calls for
certain criteria to be followed by both the property owner and renter, how will the City have the ability to
enforce that criteria?
Although proponents of the ordinance tout it as being temporary, I would not be surprised if once it is
established it is renewed every three years. It is very difficult to undo something once it becomes operative
for a period of time.
There appears to be an increase in vacation rentals here, which have obviously contributed to the housing
shortage. Does Port Angeles have any restrictions on property owners turning homes into Airbnb's, etc?
I realize a shortage of low income housing and chronic homelessness is a serious problem. However, the
ordinance being proposed is an unacceptable solution and will most likely do more harm than good without
resolving the underlying problem.
Sincerely,
Joanne Eagan
1938 Hamilton Way
Port Angeles, CA 98363
Attachment B: Public Comment
B-111
2
360‐461‐5267
Attachment B: Public Comment
B-112
1
Kevin Bagwell
From:Allyson Brekke
Sent:Wednesday, August 22, 2018 8:36 AM
To:Kevin Bagwell
Subject:FW: Affordable housing
‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐
From: John Marrs [mailto:Marrsman@earthlink.net]
Sent: Tuesday, August 21, 2018 7:49 PM
To: Allyson Brekke <Abrekke@cityofpa.us>
Subject: Affordable housing
I support an ordinance to make more rental housing available in Port Angeles at affordable rates.
John Merton Marrs
Sent from my iPad
Attachment B: Public Comment
B-113
1
Kevin Bagwell
From:Allyson Brekke
Sent:Tuesday, August 21, 2018 6:37 PM
To:Kevin Bagwell
Subject:Fwd: Temporary use of RVs as housing.
-------- Original message --------
From: authorlil@olypen.com
Date: 8/21/18 5:39 PM (GMT-08:00) To: Allyson Brekke <Abrekke@cityofpa.us> Subject: Temporary use of RVs as housing.
This is a terrible idea and will lead to many other problems.
A better solution is to fast-track RV park developments; that industry is already set up to facilitate RVs as homes.
Putting RVs on residential lots is an illegal way to change zoning. It
will increase traffic, stress on city services and devalue adjoining
property. What compensation are you offering neighbors of these prohibited rentals? Both the police and fire departments voiced
concerns about this option. In addition, tenants have rights under the
Landlord-Tenant WAC; terminating a lease may not be as easy as saying "Bye-Bye."
Please act responsibility; make building or installing rental units (both apartments and homes) affordable in Port Angeles on property zoned
correctly.
Lily Todd, Broker
Living, Working & Having Fun on the Olympic Peninsula!
RE/MAX Evergreen
505 E 8th Street, Suite B
Port Angeles, WA 98362
360-670-7578 (Cell)
360-504-3491 (Direct)
360-457-6600 (Office)
Attachment B: Public Comment
B-114
1
Allyson Brekke
From:Kari Martinez-Bailey
Sent:Wednesday, August 22, 2018 8:16 AM
To:Allyson Brekke
Cc:Nathan West
Subject:FW: Temporary RV’s
fyi
‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐
From: Marcia Rutledge [mailto:marciaannerutledge@icloud.com]
Sent: Tuesday, August 21, 2018 4:45 PM
To: City Council <council@cityofpa.us>
Subject: Temporary RV’s
I am concerned about the proposed ordinance to allow RV’s on private property for up to one year.
I see only additional head aches and enforcement concerns with this proposal.
Who will monitor the RV’s for proper hook ups and length of time? How will this affect property values in the city? I for
one would be upset with a mini RV Park next door to me!! If this is allowed it will be externally difficult if not impossible
to eliminate in the future.
This town has already become shabby and run down. There are piles of discarded trash, household items and old
appliances in front yards and now the city is considering adding RV’s to the mix!! No thank you. If the City is so
concerned about rents and affordable housing then the City should purchase or lease property and run a temporary RV
Park not allow my neighbor to profit off of some unfortunate person who is struggling to make ends meet.
Sent from my iPhone
Attachment B: Public Comment
B-115
1
Kevin Bagwell
From:Allyson Brekke
Sent:Wednesday, August 22, 2018 8:39 AM
To:Kevin Bagwell
Subject:FW: Support for affordable housing options in PA
‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐
From: Marie Marrs [mailto:marie.heroncove@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, August 21, 2018 10:00 PM
To: Allyson Brekke <Abrekke@cityofpa.us>
Subject: Support for affordable housing options in PA
Dear Ms Brekke,
I’d like to register my support for more affordable housing options in Port Angeles. My husband and I are Port Angeles
tax payers and half‐time residents. I grew up in this beautiful little town and moved back when we retired.
On an entirely different note, I’d like to meet you because my maiden name should have been Brekke but when my
Norwegian grandfather came through Ellis Island, his name was Anglicized to Brackett! We’ve traveled to Norway and
seen many Brekke gravestones but I’ve never met a “real” Brekke!
Marie Brackett Marrs
306 East Front St, #8
Port Angeles, WA 98362
Attachment B: Public Comment
B-116
1
Kevin Bagwell
From:Allyson Brekke
Sent:Tuesday, August 21, 2018 6:35 PM
To:Kevin Bagwell
Subject:Fwd: Proposed ordinance to allow RV's as rental units in Port Angeles
-------- Original message --------
From: Michelle Lynn <michelle.lynn98382@gmail.com>
Date: 8/21/18 4:17 PM (GMT-08:00) To: Allyson Brekke <Abrekke@cityofpa.us> Subject: Proposed ordinance to allow RV's as rental units in Port Angeles
I own a house in Port Angeles that I have rented out since 1995. I strongly oppose this proposed ordinance to allow people to live in approved RVs on private property as a temporary fix to the housing shortage in Port Angeles. I
don't believe that there are enough resources available to be able to police this ordinance. We don't have enough
resources for compliance of the current ordinances (junk vehicles etc). I maintain my rental house and yard and do
not want my property values to go down because there are RV's in my neighbors back yards.
It costs money for the landlord to hook up to utilities and with the cost of the RV it would not be economically
feasible to rent it out for only 3 years. What happens at the end of the three years? Is the city going to pay to
enforce the removal of these RV's (and disposal and lawyers fees) once the ordinance expires? I don't think
so. You would be turning Port Angeles into a RV park. We have rules against RVs in town for a reason.
I believe that the lack of rentals in Port Angeles is due to houses being taken out of the rental market for Vacation
Rentals By Owners and other nightly rentals (similar to a hotel or motel) When I went to VRBO website there are
162 units available for rent by the night in Port Angeles. What is being done to regulate those homes? Maybe if
they had to pay a tax it would not be as profitable as it currently is to rent by the night. I know someone who was
renting out a small house for $600 per month. She is now renting it out thru VRBO and makes over $16,000 per
year. You can see that it more profitable to go the nightly route.
Michelle Lynn
(360) 207-9716
Attachment B: Public Comment
B-117
1
Kevin Bagwell
From:Allyson Brekke
Sent:Wednesday, August 22, 2018 8:37 AM
To:Kevin Bagwell
Subject:FW: Affordable Housing Options
From: Rebecca Morgan [mailto:rsmtime@yahoo.com]
Sent: Tuesday, August 21, 2018 8:09 PM
To: Allyson Brekke <Abrekke@cityofpa.us>
Subject: Affordable Housing Options
We need to do anything we reasonably can to provide more affordable housing. Thank you for your efforts!
Sincerely,
Becky Morgan (rsmtime@yahoo.com)
Attachment B: Public Comment
B-118
1
Allyson Brekke
From:Kari Martinez-Bailey
Sent:Wednesday, August 22, 2018 8:17 AM
To:Allyson Brekke
Cc:Nathan West
Subject:FW:
fyi
From: Tom Whitty [mailto:tomwhitty66@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, August 21, 2018 10:29 PM
To: City Council <council@cityofpa.us>
Subject:
I think allowing residents to host or rent out an RV on their property is a fine idea. At least a trial version of
such an ordnance ought to be given a chance.
Attachment B: Public Comment
B-119